Barbarians on Roman imperial coins and sculpture / by Annalina Caló Levi

8/20/2019 Barbarians on Roman imperial coins and sculpture / by Annalina Caló Levi

1/84

Barbarians on Roman Imperial

Coins and Sculpture

By ANNALINA CALÖ LEVI

THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

BROADWAY AT 156TH STREETNEW YORK

I952

C r e a

t i v e C o m m o n s A t t r i b u t i o n - N o n C o m m e r c i a l - S h a r e A l i k e / h t t p : / / w w w . h a t h i t r u s t . o r g / a c c e s s_ u s e # c c - b y - n c - s a - 4 . 0


2/84

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED BY

THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

PLATES BY MERIDEN GRAVURE COMPANYMERIDEN, CONNECTICUT

PRINTED IN GERMANY

AT J.J. AUGUSTIN - GLUCKSTADT

C r e a



3/84

NUMISMATIC NOTES AND MONOGRAPHSNumber 123

C r e a

t i v e C o m m o n s A t t r i b u t i o n - N o n C o m m e r c i a l - S h a r e A l i k e

/ h t t p : / / w w w . h a t h i t r u s t . o r g / a c c e s s_

u s e # c c - b y - n c - s a - 4 . 0


4/84

NUMISMATIC NOTES AND MONOGRAPHSis devoted to essays and treatises on subjects relating

to coins, paper money, medals and decorations.

PUBLICATION COMMITTEE

A. CARSON SIMPSON, Chairman

ALFRED R. BELLINGER

AGNES BALDWIN BRETT

THOMAS O. MABBOTT

SAWYER MCA. MOSSER, Editor

C r e a

t i v e C o m m o n s A t t r i b u t i o n - N o n C o m m e r c i a l - S h a r e A l i k e

/ h t t p : / / w w w . h a t h i t r u s t . o r g / a c c e s s_

u s e # c c - b y - n c - s a - 4 . 0


5/84

I.

II.

III.

CONTENTS

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

ABBREVIATIONS FOR FREQUENTLY CITED REFERENCES . . . . . xi

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. THE FIRST PERIOD : FEROM AUGUSTUS THEROUGH M. AURELIUSAND L. VERUS

A. pARthos . . . RoMAN[o]RUM . . . siGNA RE[DDERE] Mihi . . . coEGi . . . . . . 6B. Arcus Ad Isia and Judaea Capta Coins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

C. Domitian's Tetrapylon and Germania Capta Coins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I2

D. Some Trajanic Sculptures and Related Coin Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I4

E. The Period of M. Aurelius and L. Verus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

F. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

THE BARBARIAN AS AN ATTRIBUTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

THE SECOND AND THIRD PERIODS: THE TRADITIONAL TYPES 41GENERAL CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

C r e a



6/84


7/84

PREFACE

I wish to express my appreciation of those who have aided me inthis study. First, I wish to thank Professor Karl Lehmann of theNew York University Institute of Fine Arts, without whose constantadvice, valuable suggestions and kindly encouragement this papercould not have been written. The whole staff of the American Numis

matic Society also gave great help and cooperation: especially SawyerMcA. Mosser who assisted me in the daily labors of my investigation

and Sydney P. Noe who kindly gave access to the Museum's coins

and permission to photograph specimens for illustration. I owe to thegreat courtesy and patience of Dr. Carlo Pietrangeli of Rome severalphotographs of casts now in Rome at the Museo di Roma, to my friendDr. Catia Caprino information on objects in the Museo delle Terme inRome and the knowledge of several articles and books unavailable in

this country at the time this paper was written. I am also indebtedfor valuable information to Dr. Enrico Paribeni and Professor S. Ce

sano. Casts of coins have been kindly furnished by Mr. Frederick S.Knobloch and photographs by the Department of Coins and Medalsof the British Museum and by Mr. Hans Holzer.

My special thanks are due to my friend Dr. Bluma L. Trell withwhom it has been very pleasant to discuss several problems, to MissElaine Pond and Miss Winifred Andrew for their kindness in undertaking the tedious task of revising my English style.

NEw YORK, OCTOBER 1948

C r e a



8/84


9/84

ABB REVIATIONS FOR FREQUENTLYCITED REFERENCES

BMC. Mattingly, H. British Museum Catalogue of Coins of the RomanEmpire, Vols. I–IV, London 1923–1940.

BMCR. Gruber, H. A. British Museum Catalogue of Republican Coins,

Vols. I–III, London, 1910.G. Gnecchi, F. I Medaglioni Romani, Vols. I–III, Milano, 1912.Kaehler Kaehler, H. “Triumphbogen,” article in Pauly-Wissowa, Real

Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Zweite Reihe,Vol. 7 A 1, cols. 373–493.

Lugli, Monumenti Lugli, G. I. Monumenti antichi di Roma e Suburbio, Vols. I–IVRoma, 1931-1940.

Lugli, Centro Lugli, G. Roma Antica, Il Centro Monumentale, Roma, 1946.Maurice Maurice, J. Numismatique Constantinienne, Vols. I–III, Paris,

1908–1912.

MS. Mattingly H. and E. A. Sydenham, The Roman Imperial Coinage,Vols. I-V, London, 1923–1933.

Platner – Ashby Platner, S. B. and Th. Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, London, 1929.

Strack Strack, P. L. Untersuchungen zur römischen Reichsprägung deszweiten Jahrhunderts, Vols. I–III, Stuttgart, 1931–1937.

Strong Strong, E. La Scultura Romana da Augusto a Costantino,

Vols. I–II, Firenze, 1923–1926.

PERIODICALS

A. J.A. American Journal of ArchaeologyArch. Anz. Archäologischer Anzeiger

Bull. Com. Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma

Jhb. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts

Num. Chr. Numismatic ChronicleFöm. Mitt. Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts, Römische Ab

teilung.

xi

C r e a



10/84


11/84

INTRODUCTION

Many studies dealing with Roman imperial art take into consideration Roman imperial coin types. The importance of these types

in interpreting the meaning of extant works of art is generally

accepted, but neither the extent nor the limits of numismatic contribution to the study of art history of the imperial period has yet

been clearly defined.

That many official reliefs, statues and paintings of the empire influenced coin types is now a matter of common knowledge. It hasbeen recognized by both archaeologists and numismatists." How far

this influence went and which types can be considered direct derivatives from sculpture or paintings is still uncertain although Regling,” Strack” and others emphasized the changes which are to beexpected in the passage of certain motifs from sculpture and paintings to coins: abbreviations, liberty in representing the attributes, etc.

An investigation into the possible direct inspiration from sculpture

or painting is appropriate for those motifs which we know — fromextant monuments or from literary sources — to have appeared inthe official art as well. To mention a few of these representations:

images and busts of emperors, gods, prisoners, personifications of

provinces. Also, many of the more elaborate compositions on thecoins show similarities to the historical reliefs.” Many investigations

of the origin of the coin types run into serious difficulty. There

are many coin types which are very common. They occur on coins of

* See especially H. Mattingly, Roman Coins, pp. 178ff.; K. Regling, Die antike Münze

als Kunstwerk, pp. 116ff.; K. Regling, in Otto, Handbuch der Archaeologie, I, pp. 139ff.;L. Breglia, in Rendiconti Accad. Arch. di Napoli, XVII, 1937, pp. 115ff.; A. Picard, inRevue Archéologique, XXVI, 1946, pp. 53 ff.: P. G. Hamberg, Studies in Roman ImperialArt, pp. 16ff. and for the medallions, J. M. C. Toynbee, Roman Medallions, pp. 212 f f .

*Regling, op.cit. *Strack, I ,pp. 13f. *Cf. H. Mattingly, loc. cit.

1 Monograph 123 I

C r e a



12/84

2 Barbarians on Roman Imperial Coins and Sculpture

several emperors, without any important change. It would not bereasonable to assume that all these identical types derive from a com

plete series of sculptures or paintings. It does not seem very likelyeither that all die engravers successively took their inspirationdirectly from the same work of art.

A solution to this problem was given by Lehmann who expressedthe theory that new coin types reflect an only slightly earlier work of

the official art." Therefore, an origin from a sculpture or painting

may be assumed whenever a representation is found on a coin for

the first time. Later coins with the same representation would copy

the earlier type. This view was rejected by Strack" and has yet to bedefinitely proved. It is evident that, as far as sculpture is concerned,the theory of the new types can be demonstrated only by a compara

tive study of several motifs as they appear both on coins and insculpture during the whole imperial period.

Such a comparative study has been made in this paper and attention has been given to two problems closely connected with the theory

of the new types. The first one is whether the theory is acceptable

for the whole imperial period. The second is whether the coin types

which are not new repeat earlier ones without any connection withthe trends of official sculpture. A large number of representations

both on coins and in

sculpture have the purpose

of celebrating a

victory or the victorious power of the emperor. Unusually interesting

among the coins of this kind are those which show figures of defeatedbarbarians. This class of representations is especially suitable as abasis for a comparative study because it represents a series whichranges from the age of Augustus until the latest times of the empire.

This paper presents some of the results of a complete study of thesefigures of barbarians both on coins and in official sculpture. Types of * “Wenn so plôtzlich auf Münzen ein neues Thema erscheint, noch dazu eines von an

sich typisch und durchaus nicht singular historischem Charakter, so darf als Anlaf’und Vorbild ein gleichzeitigoder nicht viel früherentstandenes Werk der großen Kunstgelten” (K. Lehmann-Hartleben, Trajanssäule, p. 17; see also idem, in Röm. Mitt.,38/39, 1923/1924, pp. 185ff.).

* Strack, loc. cit.

C r e a



13/84

Introduction 3

the coins as well as those of the medallions have been considered.

Provincial and local coinage of the period is out of the scope of our

inquiry since it presents a set of problems quite different from thoseof the Roman coins.

The ideas dictating the representations of the barbarians both on

coins and in official sculpture are certainly the same. The victoryalways belongs to the emperor. On official reliefs the emperor always

is the center of attention. Barbarians appear either to celebrate aspecific victory of the emperor or, in a more general way, his victorious power. Battles between Romans and barbarians, the outcome

of which might be uncertain, are unknown. The barbarian is always

the vanquished, the humiliated, the prisoner, and the highest dignity

he may reach is that of being invested by the emperor with thesovereignty of his country, only, however, as vassal king of theRomans. This Roman attitude towards the barbarian is evident from

the earliest times of the empire and holds firm throughout the wholeimperial period. The position of the barbarian grows more abasedfrom the end of the second century. This is apparent from a comparison of the representations of the column of M. Aurelius with thoseof the column of Trajan." The barbarian on the column of M. Aureliusappears more completely defeated. The final annihilation of the

enemy is a favorite theme of this monument. The majesty of theemperor is even more stressed than on the column of Trajan. Correspondingly, on the coins the barbarian becomes less important physiccally. He appears most often as an accessory to the figure of theemperor or Victory or some other Roman authority, whose majesty isincreasingly stressed, and who often exercises acts of cruelty on thevanquished. It is interesting to recall the last arch we know to havebeen erected in Rome by the Senatus Populusque Romanus in honorof an emperor. This arch celebrated Arcadius, Honorius and Theodosius “because they had wiped off from the face of the earth the nation

of the Goths” in 405, only four years before the assault on Rome by7 M. Wegner, in Jhb., XLVI, 1931, pp. 76ff.* Kaehler, col. 4oo, no.43; cf. R. Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations of Ancient Rome, p.262.

1*

C r e a



14/84


that nation. Also on the coins of the latest period, the emperor, in

contrast to historic reality, is celebrated as the vanquisher of the

barbarians. Neither on coins nor in official sculpture did the adventof Christianity cause any change in the conception of the barbarian.

He appears until the end as a sign of a victory or of the victoriouspower of the emperor over his military enemies.

This identity of ideas is expressed through the same motifs bothin sculpture and on coins. Faced with the necessity of expressing themaximum of ideas in a minimum of space, the die-engraver summarized multifigured scenes. Only the principal actors appear on coins.Landscapes, as well as every detail not essential to understanding thescene, are left out in the great majority of cases. Keeping this in mind,

we find that the battle scenes of sculpture have their counterpart on

the coins in representations such as those pictured in PLATE VI, 5;

PLATE X, 5. The scene is usually reduced to the triumphant emperor

and a single enemy. The various forms of homage scenes, that is thoserepresentations where the barbarian is paying homage to the emperor,

can be seen abbreviated on several types (PLATE VII, I ) .Barbarians i nthe triumphal procession (PLATE IX, 3 )and the migrations o fthebarbarians after the war” (PLATE XVII, 3 )are also found on coins.Isolated figures o

fbarbarians decorated buildings o

rfora, o rspandrels

o f

the arches,

and are found on the coins (PLATE I , 3 ;

PLATE V,I).

Thewell known motif o

fthe prisoner o

rprisoners a t

the foot o f atrophy i s

very common on coins. This i salso true for those representationsshowing the emperor and adefeated enemy (PLATE VI, 2 ,3).

The greatest difference between coins and official sculpture i s i nthe

number o f

times acertain motif appears. Homage scenes are comparatively rare on coins. The only abbreviated multifigured scene t oappear very frequently on coins from the Flavians until the middle o f

the fourth century i sthe battle scene. Favorite subjects o f

the

coins are prisoners a t

the foot o f

atrophy, and the emperor o rVictory

with aprisoner a t

o r

under his feet. These motifs have no narrativeintent. They are purely symbolic. The preference for purely symbolic

*On the migrations, see p .

4 7 f .

C r e a



15/84

Introduction 5

representations is natural, considering the limitations imposed by the

flat and small reverse field, and it is an inherent character of the coin

types of the imperial period.It seems that we can distinguish three periods based on the sym

bolic or narrative character of the scenes: the first, which lasted until

the reign of M. Aurelius and L. Verus, shows occasional scenes of anarrative character; the second, from M. Aurelius and Commodus

until Constantine shows symbolic scenes on the coins and severalmultifigured scenes on the medallions; the third, after Constantine,

shows almost exclusively symbolic figures on both coins and medallions. This division into three periods seems even more convincing

if we notice that very often in the first period a certain war is celebrated by several new types and by several types formerly in use, andthat details of arms and dress of the barbarians are rather carefully

rendered. In the second period we find a far smaller number of newtypes on the coins and the barbarian is generally found as a smallaccessory to a figure of the emperor, Victory, or a virtue without any

attention to details of dress and armor. The third period, with a fewexceptions, shows a gradual impoverishment of the types.

C r e a



16/84

THE FIRST PERIOD: FROM AUGUSTUS THROUGHM. AURELIUS AND L. VERUS

The new types with barbarians found on coins from the age of Augustus through the reign of M. Aurelius and L. Verus and theirrelationship to contemporary sculpture are the subject of this chapter.

Not all new types of this period will be treated. Roman imperialsculpture does not offer us, as the coinage does, a complete series of

dated monuments. A very large part of Roman sculpture is now lost.Among the new coin types, we have selected those which show a very

close connection to extant works of the contemporary sculpture or

else to works of sculpture for whose existence we have considerableevidence. These are the types which are treated at greater length.

Mention is made also of several other types not only in the text, butespecially in the footnotes, whenever this seems to give a better under

standing of the topic under discussion. The conclusions we draw fromthe study of the above mentioned new types appear on p. 23.

A. PARTHOs . . . ROMAN[o]RUM . . . SIGNA RE[DDERE] MIHI ... COEGI*

A triple arch appears on coins struck in Spain in 18/17 B. C."(PLATE I, 1 )

. This representation i svery similar t othe one found o n

denarii from the mint o f

Rome struck by the moneyer L .Vinicius i n

1 6

B .

c.” (PLATE I ,2). These are s osimilar that several authors believe

*Res Gestae Divi Augusti, C .Barini rec., V, 40–42.

*BMC, I , p .

73, nos. 427-429, pl. Io, 2 , 3 .

*BMC, I ,pp. 14.f., nos. 77, 78, pl. 3 , 4 .

C r e a



17/84

Augustus to M. Aurelius and L. Verus 7

that both types give the image of the same arch.” It seems, however,that the difference between the two is far too great to be explained

only by the fact that the coins originate from two different mints. The two side passageways have a markedly different aspect." Furthermore, on the Spanish coins the two figures on the side of the centralquadriga are certainly to be identified as barbarians because they are

naked and have long hair and possibly beards. On the Roman coinsthey are very crudely drawn and on most specimens they look more

like Roman soldiers than barbarians. The two types, therefore,probably reproduce two different buildings." While no satisfactory

explanation has yet been found for the arch on L. Vinicius' denarius,

no doubt is possible as to the one on the Spanish coins since the legend

is clear enough.

It is the arch erected near the temple of Divus Julius in honor of therecovery of the standards lost by Crassus at Carrhae." The sculptures

of this arch had a widespread influence. This is demonstrated by thefact that no figure of a barbarian presenting a Roman standardappears on any monument earlier than the arch.

The Parthian presenting a standard to Mars on the cuirass of theAugustus from Prima Porta was probably directly derived fromthe two standard bearers represented on the monument which appears

on the Spanish coin. Their similarity is certainly striking.”Among the coins Augustus issued celebrating his settlement of

Partho-Armenian affairs are denarii struck at Rome in 18 B. C.” On

* Recently L. Laffranchi, in Riv. Ital. Num, 27, 1914, pp. 317 f . ;

Kaehler, col. 38o,

no. 9 ; L . B .Holland, i nA. J .A., L

,1946, pp. 52ff.

*M. Stuart, i nA. J .A., XLIX, 1945, p .233. *Recently M. Bernhart, i nDeutsches Jahrb. f . Num., 1938, pp. 151 f .

; G . Lugli,

Monumenti minori del Foro Romano, pp. 7 7ff.; A . Degrassi, i nRendiconti Pont. Acc.

Arch., 1945–1946, pp. 57ff.; G .Gatti, i nRendiconti Pont. Acc. Arch., 1945, pp. 105ff.

*Cf. Kaehler, loc. cit.

* The derivation o fthis figure from the arch has already been suggested by E .Loewy,

i nRöm. Mitt., 42, 1927, p .

215. On the Prima Porta Augustus, see lately A .

Alföldi, i nRöm. Mitt., 52, 1937, pp. 48ff.; V

.Müller, i nAm. Journ. Phil., 62, 1941, pp. 496ff.*BMC, I , p . 8 , nos. 40–42, p

l . 2 , 2 ;

idem, p .

11, nos. 56–59, pl. 2 ,

11, 12; idem, pp. 3f.,

nos. 10-17, pl. 1 , 7-9.

C r e a



18/84


the reverse they show a kneeling Parthian holding a Roman standard(PLATE I, 3). The type is new for a Roman coin.” It is connected by itslegend (CAESAR AUGUSTUS SIGN RECE) with the event celebrated bythe arch of Augustus. We also have good reason to connect the coinwith this monument because of its type. This arch, which is not extant, may be connected with two triple arches erected at PisidianAntioch. A triple arch was erected in that city by C. Julius Asper,

consul of A.D. 212.10 From each of the two spandrels of the centralarchway come blocks with the relief figure of a barbarian kneeling

and holding a Roman standard (PLATE II, 1). The similarity betweenthe barbarian of the right spandrel" (PLATE II, 2) and the figure onthe denarii is certainly striking both in regard to costume and to thetype of standard he holds. The arch of Asper was certainly an imitation of an earlier one, also erected at Antioch,” in the age of Augustus.

Remains of the sculptural decoration of this monument, too, are extant. Slabs once in the spandrels show kneeling barbarians. It seemspossible that the prototype for these arches of Antioch was the archof Augustus near the temple of Divus Julius. This arch very probably

was decorated with figures of kneeling barbarians in the spandrels

and at least one of them was a Parthian standard bearer similar to

the one on the arch of Asper. This figure was very likely the model of

* Kneeling barbarians holding Roman standards are later found on coins of L. CaniniusGallus (BMC, I, p. 27, nos. 127–130, pl. 4, 16) and Domitian (BMC, II, p. 42,nos. 231—233, pl. 7, 6). Also on a gem in Berlin (A. Furtwängler, Die antike Gemmen,pl. 37, no. 25; D. Mustilli, L'iconografia e l'epopea di Augusto nella glittica, p. 15, pl. II,7); on a gladiatorial helmet in the Museum of Naples (W. Schmid, in Strena Buliciana,

pp. 49ff., figs. 3–5; Schumacher-Klumbach, Germanendarstellungen, I, no. 15o;V. P. Bienkowski, Germania, II, 1918, p. 14); on a lamp in the Wollman Collection(Schumacher-Klumbach, op. cit., no. 95). The gladiatorial helmet and the lamp have

been rightly connected with the recovery of the standards lost by Varus.

* Th.H. Robinson, in Art Bulletin, IX, 1926, pp. 45ff., figs. 69ff.; Kaehler, col. 454,no. 5b.

* PLATE II, 2 shows the upper part of the kneeling barbarian (Robinson, op.cit.,fig. 69), PLATE II, 1, a reconstruction by F. J. Woodbridge of the arch (Robinson,op. cit., fig. 67). For the lower part of the barbarian see Robinson, op.cit., fig. 71.

* Robinson, op.cit., pp. 21 ff., figs. 41, 42; Kaehler, col. 453, no. 5a.

C r e a



19/84


the denarii referred to above. Possibly, another type of Augustus can

be connected with the decorations of the spandrels in the same arch.

The settlement of Armenia's affairs was also part of the politicalsuccesses of 20 B.C. A kneeling Armenian is represented on denariiwhich were struck at Rome in 18 B. C (PLATE II, 3).”

B. Arcus Ad Isis and Judaea Capta Coins

Josephus' informs us that Vespasian and Titus spent the nightpreceding the celebration of their triumph for the capture of Jerusalem in the temple of Isis in the Campus Martius.” The triumph tookplace

at the end of

June in the year 71 A. D. Coins showing the temple

of Isis on the reverse were struck to commemorate this event.”

The inscription on the attic of a triple arch represented on one of the reliefs from the tomb of the Haterii family" (PLATE III, I) readsARCUS AD ISIS. It is generally agreed that the Arcus ad Isis was on theVia Labicana near the temple of Isis in the third region.” Because of the location of the other monuments represented in the Haterii relief,

it seems rather unlikely that the arch was located near the temple inthe Campus Martius. The fact that the arch was erected near asanctuary of Isis rather reflects the high consideration Isis enjoyed

** BMC, I, p. 4f., pl. 1, Io- 12; p. 8, no. 43, pl. 2, 3.* Josephus, De bello judaico, VII, 5, 4.* On this temple, see Platner-Ashby, pp. 283ff.; Lugli, Monumenti, III, pp. 107 ff.;D. F. Brown, Architectura Numismatica, I, (New York University, 1941, diss, unpublished), pp. 95ff.

* Brown, op.cit.

* See specially Kaehler, col. 401, no. 45; Strack, I, p. 93; Spano, in Atti Accad. Arch.di Napoli, 24, 1906, pp. 259ff.; Cf. F. Castagnoli, in Bull. Com., LXIX, 1941, p. 59and for illustration P. Gusman, L'art décoratif de Rome, II, pl. 115.* See for instance Lugli, Monumenti, III, p. 389; Platner-Ashby, p. 4o; Kaehler (loc.cit.) is uncertain whether the arch was set up in the vicinity of the temple in the

Campus Martius or near the one in the third region. On the sanctuary of the thirdregion, see Platner-Ashby, pp. 285f. It seems that a good solution to the ratherentangled question of the exact location of this sanctuary is given by Lugli's hypo

thesis that two sanctuaries of Isis existed in the third region.

C r e a



20/84

Io Barbarians on Roman Imperial Coins and Sculpture

from Vespasian. When this arch was erected, we do not know. Itmight have been erected before the triumph, possibly very soon after

the capture of Jerusalem (7/8 September 70). That it was erected forVespasian and Titus' victory over the Jews is demonstrated by thefact that in the Haterii relief we see on the attic of the arch, on each

side of the central quadriga, a palm-tree with prisoners tied at itsfoot. The palm-tree stands as a symbol for Judaea. It is probable thatit was erected before 79, the year of Vespasian's death, since twoarches were erected after this date which also commemorated the

victory over the Jews. One was erected at the entrance of the CircusMaximus." The other, erected after Titus' death, i s

, o fcourse, the one

on the Sacra Via."

The Jewish war was widely celebrated o ncoins also. Types referring

t o i tform two main groups. The first i scomposed o f

coins issued byVespasian and Titus before Vespasian's death and especially i ntheyears 7

1 t o73. The second consists o fcoins o f Titus issued i n80/81.

Therefore, broadly speaking, the first group corresponds t othe Arcussis, the second t othe arch i nthe Circus Maximus. The first group

presents several representations new t ocoins, while the coins o f Titus

Augustus repeat, a sfar a srepresentations o f

barbarians are concerned,

the most famous type o f

the issues o fVespasian's reign, astanding

prisoner and amourning woman a

t

the foot o

f

apalm tree” (PLATE III,2). Leaving aside, therefore, the coins o f Titus Augustus, i t i simportant t oexamine those issued during the reign o

fVespasian. I n

most o f

these the palm tree appears over and over again a s asymbol

for Judaea and obviously a s asubstitution for the trophy.” This

*Kaehler, col. 385 f . ,

no. 22; Platner-Ashby, p .

45.

* Kaehler, col. 386, no. 23; K .Lehmann-Hartleben, i nBull. Com., LXII, 1934, pp. 89ff.

*Sestertii o fVespasian: BMC. II, pp. 115f., nos. 532–539, pl. XX, 4–7; idem,

pp. 116f., nos. 540-542, pl. 20, 9 ;

idem, p .

185, nos. 761–764, pl. 33, I-3; sestertiiand a s o

f Titus struck 80–81 A.D.: BMC. II, p .

256, nos. 161–163, pl. 48, 8 ;

idem,

pp. 256f., nos. 164–17o, pl. 48, 9 ,

Io; idem, p .

266, no. + ;

idem, p .

294, no. 308,pl. 57, 4 .

*See the preceding and following note. The palm-tree may appear also a sthe single

decoration o f

the field (see BMC. II, pl. 24, 1–3, 6); i nthe centre, with the emperor on

C r e a



21/84

Augustus to M. Aurelius and L. Verus IIsubstitution is found for the first time on asses struck at Tarraco and

at an unidentified Gaulish mint, and also on denarii of the mint of

Rome in 69/70.” On these coins a mourning Judaean appears at thefoot of a palm-tree (PLATE III, 3). The similarity of this motif, barbarians at the foot of a palm-tree, on the attic of the Arcus ad Isisand on the coins, is certainly striking.

Possibly, several of the coin types issued in honor of the victory

over the Jews during Vespasian's reign, were influenced by this arch.It is noteworthy, for instance, that the type showing a standingprisoner and a mourning woman (PLATE III, 2) presents, for thefirst time in the history of Roman coins, two barbarians together inthis attitude." It should also be mentioned in this connection that thesculptor of the Haterii relief worked in a crude way and his details aregenerally sketchy.

one side and Judaea or a standing male prisoner on the other (see BMC. II, pl. 2, 1o,14; pl. 18, 20; pl. 19, 7; pl. 20, 8, Io; pl. 25, 1; pl. 33, 4; pl. 37, 1,7; pl. 39, 1; pl. 40, 1 ;

H. A. Cahn, in Num. Chron., VI Series, VI, 1946, p. 11, no. 8, Pl. I, 5); on bronze coinswhere the emperor and suppliant Jews also appear (BMC. II, pl. 26, 2); with Judaeastanding (BMC. II, pl. 12, 11, 12; pl. 13, 8, 9).* BMC. II, p. 181, no. §, pl. 32, 1; idem, p. 193, no. + ; idem, pp. 6f., nos. 43, 44,pl. 1, 13. The type appears later on coins issued in 71, 72, 73, 77/78 and also onundated ones.

* Generally, on Republican coins, whenever two barbarians are represented at foot of a trophy – it has been pointed out above that on the Judaea Capta coins the palmtree is a substitution for the trophy — they are both seated or else one is seated, the

other kneeling. Standing prisoners appear at foot of a trophy, but in scenes of adifferent kind, as on denarii of S. Sulpicius Galba (BMCR, I, p. 488, nos. 3907 f,pl. XLVIII, 21) and L. Aemilius Paulus (idem, p. 418, no. 3373, pl. XLIII, 8). Themotif of the standing man and seated woman at foot of a trophy was on the contrary,already well known in sculpture. To the monuments showing this motif quoted by

K. Woelcke (in Bonner Jahrbücher, 120, 1911, p. 178) a few others should be added:the decoration on a shield on a relief at Parma (E. Loewy, in Jahrb. d. Kunsthist.Sammlungen in Wien, N. F. II, 1928, pl. III) and, later, the groups on the arch of M. Aurelius at Tripoli (G. Caputo, in Africa Italiana, 1940, p. 46, figs. 24, 29; Kaehler,

col. 443, no. 5o; of the earlier bibliography on this arch, see specially S. Aurigemma,in Bollettino d'arte, XIX, 1926, p. 554, fig. 6 and F. Noack, in Warburg Vorträge,1925/1926, p. 200). See also the base found at Corinth (Corinth, Results of Excavations,IX, no. 224).

*

C r e a



22/84


It seems very probable that the most important new elementfound on the issues commemorating the Jewish war, the palm-tree,

was borrowed from the sculptural decoration of the Arcus ad Isis.

C. Domitian's Tetrapylon and Germania Capta Coins

Domitian's triumph over the Chatti in 83 A. D. was widely cele

brated on the coins of the period. Several new types appear showing

barbarians. Among these, the type showing a standing prisoner and amourning woman at the foot of a trophy, is especially interesting

(PLATE IV, 1). It appears on sestertii struck in 85, 86 and 87. Itssimilarity with the Judaea Capta type examined above is obvious.Nevertheless, at a closer examination, many differences between the

two appear and several elements new to Roman coins are noticeable

on the Germania Capta type. The trophy represented is different fromany other trophy represented before on a Roman coin because of the

German “sagum” so prominently displayed. On republican and earlierimperial coins, a cuirass or a short tunic is generally found in its place.Moreover, the weapons scattered in the lower part of the field aredifferent from those represented on the Judaea Capta type. Coins of

85 A. D. also show an arch, a tetrapylon, surmounted by two qua

drigae, drawn by elephants (PLATE IV, 2). This type appears for thefirst time on sestertii of the same issue as the first of the above quoted

coins showing a standing prisoner and a seated woman at the foot of a trophy and later, without any important change, in 90/91 and in95/96.” In Kaehler's opinion” this tetrapylon is the porta triumphalis

which is also represented after the age of Domitian on several monuments commemorating an emperor's entry into or departure from the

* BMC. II, p. 362, no. 294, pl. 70, 8; idem, p. 369, nos. 325, 326, pl. 72, 8; idem,p. 376, no. 361, pl. 74, 2; idem, p. 38o, no. 372, pl. 75, 4; idem, p. 385, no. 395, pl. 76, 6.

* BMC, II, p. 364, no. + pl. 71, 6; p. 399, no. *; p. 407, no. f, pl. 81, I. On this

arch see especially Kaehler,

col. 374;

cf. M. Bernhart,

Handbuch zur Münzkunde derrömischen Kaisergeit, p. 133; J. Liegle, in Antike, 1936, p. 219, fig. 20b.* loc. cit. in note 1. The same theory is also propounded by F. Castagnoli in Bull. Com.,LXXI, 1943–1945, pp. 137 ff.

C r e a



23/84

Augustus to M. Aurelius and L. Verus I3

city." This theory is certainly not contradicted by the fact that the

construction of the tetrapylon was connected with Domitian's victory

over the Chatti. The most detailed representation of the monument is that on one

of the Aurelian reliefs of the arch of Constantine (PLATE IV, 3).” Onthe attic, at the left, a group of a standing prisoner and a mourning

seated woman at the foot of a trophy is visible. The prisoner wears the

costume of the Germans. The group does certainly differ in severaldetails from the one on the coins (PLATE IV,1), especially as far as thearms are concerned. The prisoner's hands are tied in front, while onthe coins they are tied in back. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied thatthe general composition of the scene, the costume of the man, the

attitude and dress of the woman are the same. It is very likely thatone coin type reproduces one group of the arch—another certainly

existed on the other side of the elephants’ quadriga, and the Aureliansculptor did not have space enough for it – and the other coin typereproduces the arch itself.

It has been noticed above that the trophy on the type in PLATE IV, 1is different from any other trophy represented before on a Roman

coin because of the German “sagum” so prominently displayed. Thissame kind of trophy appears on other coins of Domitian comme

morating the same war. That this trophy was influenced by thesculpture of the period is shown by one of thetwo trophies of the period

of Domitian which now decorate the balustrade of the Capitol in Rome,

the so-called “trofei di Mario.” This trophy also has the “sagum.”

* Stuart Jones (in Papers Brit. School at Rome, III, 1906, pp. 259ff) has alreadyidentified the arch represented on two medallions of M. Aurelius (G., II, p. 27, nos. 2,3, pl. 59, 5), on two Aurelian reliefs of the arch of Constantine (H. P. L'Orange, Spät

antike Bildschmuck des Constantinsbogens, pl. 47a, b) with the tetrapylon on the

sestertii of Domitian. The tetrapylon is again represented on the Constantinian friezes

of the same arch (see L'Orange, op. cit., pp. 74 and 79ff, pls. 13b and 18d). Cf. alsoMartial, VIII, 65.

* L'Orange, op.cit., pl. 47b; Strong, pp.

253 ff., fig. 158; Hamberg, op. cit., pp. 83ff.,

pl. 11; M. Wegner, in Arch. Anz., 1938, p. 18o; J. Dobias, in Revue Numism., 35, 1932,p. 155; etc.

* The connection between the trophy of the coins and the one on the Capitol has been

C r e a



24/84

I4 Barbarians on Roman Imperial Coins and Sculpture

D. Some Trajanic Sculptures and Related Coin Types

Many new coin types showing figures of barbarians were struckduring Trajan's reign. They commemorate his wars on the Danube

and in the East. Most of them present symbolical figures or groups.Some show scenes of a narrative character. On denarii dated to

107/III, a Dacian prisoner appears as the only figure on the reverse"(PLATE V, 1 )

.He i sstanding left, with his hands tied i nfront. This

i sthe only representation on aRoman coin o f

astanding prisoner

with hands thus tied. The only example t ooccur i nsculpture earlier

than the age o f Trajan, i s i nthe group on the attic o fthe tetrapylon

o f

Domitian” (PLATE IV, 3). Because o fhis attitude and his nationality,

the Dacian on the denarii immediately recalls the well known statues

on the attic o f

the arch o f

Constantine” (PLATE V ,

3). They formerly

suggested by K .

Lehmann-Hartleben (Röm. Mitt., 38/39, 1923/1924, p .

192). On the

“trofei d i

Mario” see also Strong pp. 128f., fig. 82; W. Helbig-W. Amelung, Führerdurch die Öff. Sammlungen klassischer Altertümer i nRom, I ,pp. 409ff.; P .Bienkowski,

De simulacris barbararum gentium apud Romanos, p .

39, fig. 19; M. J .Macrea, i n Anuarul Institutului d estudii clasice, II, 1933/1935, p

.Io9. I nthis connection, see also

the interesting coin type showing amale barbarian i nfront o f

atrophy found on an

aureus o f

Domitian (Basel Münzhandlung Sale Cat., 6 ,

1936, pl. 16, no. 1639).

*BMC. III, pp. 82f., nos. 381-383, pl. 15, 13. *See above, p

.13.

*Seven o fthe eight statues o nthe attic have been restored, and one i sentirely modern

(cf. Bull. Com., 1918, pp. 161 ff., pl. V). The lower part o fthe original eighth statue i s

i nthe Museo Capitolino (H. Stuart Jones, The Sculptures o f the Museo Capitolino, p .

31, no. 21, pl. 7 ;

cf. the statue i nthe Villa Borghese, Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, no. 2867). Asimilar image, probably o

f asomewhat later date, i s i nthe

Museo Laterano (A. Della Seta, Imonumenti dell'antichitā classica; II, fig. 516); threeheads (two o

fthese were found i nthe Forum Traiani) are i nthe Braccio Nuovo

(W. Amelung, Die Sculpturen des Vaticanischen Museums, nos. 9 ,

118, 127) cf. also a

torso i nthe Chiaramonti (Amelung, op.cit., I ,pl. 57, no. 356) and ahead i ntheBritish Museum (Catalogue no. 1770). They are remains o

fsimilar statues. For the

porphyry Dacians, now i nParis and Florence, and their possible connection with the“porticus porphyretica” o

fthe Forum o

f Trajan, see R .Delbrück, Antike Porphyr

werke, pp. 4 3

ff., pls. 3 ,

4and p .

135; cf. R

.

Paribeni, Optimus Princeps, II, pp. 8 2

f.;for the prisoners i nthe Museo Nazionale o fNaples, Paribeni, op.cit., II, pp. 78f.,fig. 9

;Guida Ruesch, p

.22, nos. 76, 77. On the Trajanic statues o

fprisoners i ngeneral,

M. Pallottino, Arte figurativa eornamentale, p .

95.

C r e a



25/84


decorated the Forum Traiani, probably the colonnades. Their exactdate is not known. The Forum was dedicated in II3 A. D. Work on

the new Forum had possibly already begun during the reign of Domitian,” certainly by Io.7. There is no reason to believe that the statuesdid not already exist at the time the denarii (PLATE V, 1) were issued.In this case we have, therefore, the prototype of a new coin typeamong the extant works of sculpture.

-

It is interesting now to investigate whether the colossal statues of the Dacians were new creations of Trajan's period. Similar statueswere used later as decorations of public buildings of various kinds."

It is possible, however, that they were first used on a triumphal arch,in the same place the Dacians of the period of Trajan now occupy on

the arch of Constantine. In fact, a triple arch appears on a sestertiusof Ioo A. D." The aspect of the attic suggests that statues had beenset up in front of i t

”(PLATE V

,2). Neither the location o

fthis arch nor

the occasion for its construction i sknown since Trajan had not

achieved any major military success u p t othis date.” I t i swell known

that most o f

the many arches Domitian erected i nRome were destroyed after his death.” I t i snot unlikely that some were only

defaced. We know o f an inscription which has been connected byMommsen with an arch erected for Domitian's victories over the

Dacians and the Chatti." I t i spossible

that the arch represented

on *See Lugli, Centro, p

.280. Cf. Platner-Ashby, pp. 237 f f

.

* Acolossal statue o f

an Oriental barbarian found a tEphesus (J. Keil, i n Jahreshefte

ost. Inst., XXVIII, 1933, Suppl. col. 37f., no. 4 , fig. 22) has certainly the Dacian o f Trajan a sprototype. At Ephesus the torso o fanother colossal barbarian was found(Keil, op.cit., cols. 38f., no. 5

,fig. 21). Cf. also the “stoa o

fthe colossal figures” a

t

Corinth (Corinth, Results o fExcavations, IX, pp. IoIff., nos. 217f.) where barbariansappear a

ssupporting figures on the upper story.

*BMC, III, p . 152, no. f . ; Strack, I , p . 92, pl. IV, no. 331. See Kaehler, col. 387,no. 25.

* Kaehler, loc. cit.

* The victory over the Suebi o f 9 7 i sthe only one which could be taken i nconsideration.

*Dio Cassius, LXVIII, 1 .

1 0CIL, VI, 1207; c f

.Kaehler, col. 387, no. 2

4and L .Morpurgo, i nBull. Com., 36, 1908,

P. 1242 4.

C r e a



26/84


Trajan's sestertius reproduces an arch erected by Domitian, rededicated by Trajan and decorated, on the attic, with colossal statues of Dacians.

Although they will be treated later again, in connection with thebarbarian as an “attribute,”** mention should be made now of three

new Trajanic coin types. They have already been interpreted by several scholars. Mattingly and Strack regard them as direct repro

ductions of honorary statues of Trajan, now lost. One is found on a

sestertius (PLATE VI, 2) struck between 104 and III.” In this type,the statuary origin is suggested by the big base decorated withfestoons. On this base, military eagles and standards are visible. In thecenter, there is a second base (?) on which Trajan stands clad in a

toga. He holds the triumphal insignia, the laurel branch and sceptre. Two small barbarians appear, one on either side of the emperor. Insome specimens, they seem to be kneeling and appear to be supported

by shields. A flying Victory on the right above is crowning Trajan.

She is probably an addition or a variant due to the die-engraver. Theeagles, the standards and the barbarians are very likely part of theoriginal composition.”

On aurei and sestertiistruck between Io9 and III,” Trajan appearswith his foot on a Dacian (PLATE VI, 3). The closest numismatic* See p. 23ff.* BMC. III, p. 174, no. 826, pl. 30, 5. On this coin, see also Strack, I, p. 112, no. 364,pl. V; A. Alföldi, in Röm. Mitt., 49, 1934, p. 68, pl. II, 1; W. H. Gross, Bildnisse Trajans, p. 14, pl. 44g; cf. also H. Lehner, in Bonner Jahrbücher, 122, 1912, pp. 43of. This is the first coin where an emperor appears with two barbarians symmetricallyrepresented at his feet, one on each side. The only precedent for the type can be seenamong the coins issued by Faustus Cornelius Sulla, where the moneyer's fatherappears seated on a tribunal with king Bocchus on the left, and Jugurtha on the right

(BMCR. I, p. 471, nos. 3824f., pl. XLVII, 18; cf. L. Cesano, in Studi di Numismatica,I, 1942, p. 241).* The flying Victory would suggest a painting or a relief rather than a statuary group.But not only is a statue suggested by the large base, but also by the statuesque.appearance of the figure of Trajan.

* BMC, III, p. 65, no. 242,243, pl. 13, 13; idem, p. 173, no. 822; idem, 174, nos. 823,824, pl. 30, 3. Cf. also Strack, I, p. 113; G. Rodenwaldt, in Jhb., 37, 1922, p. 27 andpp. 23ff. of this paper.

C r e a



27/84


precedent for this type is the sestertius on which Domitian is represented with his foot on the river Rhine." Trajan's type shows a

new detail, only the head and shoulders of the barbarian are visible. This detail is also found on another type of Trajan," but it disappears

afterwards. It is certainly peculiar. From an artistic point of view, itis also rather awkward. The coins of Trajan show a generally high

standard of artistic ability. Why did the die-engraver choose suchan awkward detail? Why didn’t he represent the whole figure of theemperor's enemy? The whole figure would have been far more

effective. The meaning of the scene would have been far more readily

understandable. A careful examination of the coin types – thoseearlier as well as those later than the type of PLATE VI, 3 — does notgive, at least to the writer, an explanation of the reason the dieengraver used the half figure of the barbarian. The fact that this

detail disappeared so soon from the coins seems rather to suggest

that the die engravers did not consider it the best device to representthe emperor's enemy on a coin.

However, there is an explanation for this peculiar detail. A statueof Hadrian was found at Hierapytna (Crete). It is now at Constantinople.” The emperor appears in military dress. He is standing withhis left foot on a defeated barbarian (PLATE VI, 1 )

.Should an artist

wish t o

reproduce this statuary group on avery small and flat surfacehe would have t oresort t osome devices. The emperor would have t o

be represented more o r

less i nprofile otherwise his attitude would not

be very clear. An exact reproduction o f the whole figure o f

the

recumbent barbarian would hardly b epossible. On asmall and flatfield this recumbent figure would be hardly recognizable. The artistwould most probably limit himself t othat part o fthe figure which i s

more clearly visible from every angle, the head and the shoulders.

*BMC. II, pl. 71, 2 ;pl. 72, 12; pl. 75, 5 ;pl. 76, 7 .

*On these, Pax sets her foot o n

the Dacian (see BMC. III, p l .

13,4; p l .

29, 3,4; p l .

36, 5 . Cf. Roma with her foot on the head o f abarbarian i nBMC. III, pl. 28, 4 .

* G .Mendel, Catalogue du Musée Ottoman, II, pp. 316ff., no. 585; for bibliographicalreferences see Mostra Augustea, Catalogo, II, p . 14, no. 3 .

2 Monograph 123

C r e a



28/84


It is interesting to notice that even on a mechanical photographicreproduction such as PLATE VI, I the head and the shoulders are themost clearly visible parts of the recumbent barbarian.

Thus, the statue of Hierapytna gives the explanation, we have beenseeking in vain, of Trajan's coin type. From the above said, the statuefound at Hierapytna shows both the emperor and his defeated enemy

in about the same attitude of Trajan and his Dacian. It seems to usthat the only possible explanation for the half figure of the barbarian

on Trajan's coin is the assumption that a statue of Trajan as modelof the type existed. This statue must have been very similar to theone of Hadrian found at Hierapytna.

It has been pointed out above" that coin types showing a ridingemperor and his enemy or enemies are to be interpreted as an abbreviation of a more complex battle scene. This kind of representation isfound on coins of the Flavians since 72/73.” A type on a denarius of IoI/Io220 (PLATE VI, 4) shows several differences from earlier similartypes (PLATE VI, 5), and i s

,therefore, t obe considered new. Trajan

i snot represented i nmilitary dress, fighting and spearing his enemy,

but, clad i n atoga, raising his hand. His horse i spacing and notgalloping. He seems totally unaware o

fthe suppliant enemy who i s

merely his symbolic accessory rather than his enemy. Mattingly and

Laffranchi” suggest

that the type might b e areproduction o

f a

statue o f Trajan. I t i sbelieved that most types i nwhich the horse appearspacing o

rstanding still reproduce equestrian statues” and we know o f

an “equus Traiani” which was erected i nthe center o fthe Forum.”Narrative scenes with barbarians appear most frequently on coins

referring t o Trajan's Eastern war. The REx PARTHUS type issued

*See pp. 4f. *See BMC. II, pl. 25, 2 ;pl. 26, 3 .

*BMC. III, p .48, no. 137, pl. 11, 12. *Cf. preceding note; see L .Laffranchi, i nNumismatica, VIII, 1942, p

.45.

*Laffranchi, op.cit., p .44. *Ammianus Marcellinus, XVI, 10. Cf. R .Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations o fAncient

Rome, p .

315. “Pacing horse” types o f

later emperors will be studied on p .

26.

C r e a



29/84


in gold and bronze” commemorates the appearance of the Parthianprince Parthamasiris before Trajan at Elegeia in II4” (PLATE VII, 1 )

.

The “REGNA ADSIGNATA” type, also o ngold and bronze coins” portrays the investiture o

fthree kings by Trajan following the success o f

the campaign o f II.5, an otherwise unrecorded event (PLATE VII, 2).

The “REx PARTHIS DATUs”, on sestertii only,” records (PLATE VII, 3 )

King Parthamaspates investiture. These types are among the very

few on imperial coins which represent barbarians a sindividuals and

not a s

mere symbols o f

the vanquished race. On the “REx PARTHIS

DATUS” coins, however, the figure o fpersonified Parthia appears on

the left. There i s n oattempt a t

individual characterization o f

the

barbarian princes i nany o

f

the three types.

All three types

are t o b

e

considered new.

Although scenes o fhomage a swell a sinvestitures had been re

presented before o nRoman coins, the composition o f

earlier types wassimpler than that o

fthe types o

f Trajan's period. For instance,

Artaxias' investiture by Germanicus appears on adenarius struck byCaligula a

tCaesarea.” Here, only Germanicus and Artaxias are re

*BMC. III, p . 103, *; p . 106, f (see for illustrations: Riv. Ital. Num, 27, 1914,pl. IV, 16; Strack, op.cit., I ,pl. III, 220); idem, p .215, f ,pl. 4o, 8 .

* C . A . H., XI, p .243 and pp. 236ff. on the Eastern war i ngeneral. Cf. also R .Paribeni, op.cit., II, pp. 278ff. *BMC. III, p .115, nos. 588ff., pl. 19, 19; p . 120, nos. 613 ff., pl. 20, 1o; idem, p .222,

nos. 1043f., pl. 42, Io.

*7BMC. III, p . 223, nos. Io45ff., pl. 43, 1 . Cf. C . A .H., XI, p .249. *BMC. I , p .162, no. 104, pl. 28, 1 . This i sthe only investiture scene earlier than the

types o f Trajan. Its composition, with only two figures, both o fwhich standing, i s

found again on coins o fAntoninus Pius (BMC. IV, pp. 204f., nos. 1272ff, pl. 29, 2and 8and p

.367, no. §). The composition o

f Trajan's coin, with the emperor seated

on aplatform and additional figures, appears again o nthe coins o f L .

Verus showing

the investiture o fSohaemus a sking o fArmenia (BMC. IV, p .

426, nos. 3ooff, pl. 58,11; idem, pp. 562 f .

,nos. Io99ff, pl. 75, 8and pl. 76, 1

; idem, p .

566, nos. 1125f.,

pl. 76, 6A). Medallions o fVerus, struck i n166 (G., II, pl. 74, 1and 75, Io; c f

. J .M. C .

Toynbee, Roman Medallions, p .

110, pl. 42,4) show an adlocutio rather than theinvestiture o

f aforeign prince. After L .Verus, investitures disappear from the Roman

coins, although the appointment o fAbgar Xby Gordianus III i srepresented on thelocal coins o

fEdessa (A. R

.Bellinger, The Eighth and Ninth Dura Hoards, NNM. 85,

2*

C r e a



30/84


presented and both are standing. Similarly, the scenes of homage on

earlier coins did not have such an elaborate composition as the “REx

PARTHUs.” The reliefs of the column of Trajan show scenes whichare very similar to the three coin types under consideration” (PLATEVIII; PLATE VII, 4), although they have a far greater number of figures. That the reliefs of the column provided the model for the dieengraver is chronologically possible. The exact date at which thesculptured frieze was completed is not known,” but the date of thededication of the monument was May 18, 113 A. D.”

1939, pl. 3, 52, 54). Strack (op. cit., III, p. 66) notices that in investitures of Parthianand Armenian princes on Roman coins, the barbarian has his back turned toward theemperor and his hand raised to the diadem. He suggests that this reproduces a real

act of court ceremonial during the investiture of Oriental princes. This suggestionrequires a confirmation from other sources, which cannot be found in extant works

of sculpture. The gesture of raising the hand to a diadem or a tiara appears also onmonuments which are earlier than the Roman imperial times and does not represent

an investiture (See the base of Lysip's statue of Poulydamas in G. D. K. Treu, DieBildwerke von Olympia, III, p. 209, pl. LV, 1–3). Generally, in Roman sculpture, nodefinite line can be drawn between investitures and homage scenes. It seems veryprobable that one of the reliefs of the arch of Trajan at Benevento (A. Meomartini,

I monumenti di Benevento, p. 132, pl. XXIII) is to be interprete

Barbarians on Roman imperial coins and sculpture / by Annalina Caló Levi

Documents

Transcript of Barbarians on Roman imperial coins and sculpture / by Annalina Caló Levi