ROMAN REPUBLICAN COINAGE II
ROMAN REPUBLICAN COINAGE II BY
MICHAEL H. CRAWFORD Professor of Ancient History Universit...
457 downloads
3513 Views
24MB Size
Report
This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form
ROMAN REPUBLICAN COINAGE II
ROMAN REPUBLICAN COINAGE II BY
MICHAEL H. CRAWFORD Professor of Ancient History University College London
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo, Delhi Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521074926 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1974 Ninth printing 2008 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library
ISBN 978-0-521-07492-6 the set
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-parry internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
CONTENTS VOLUME I page is.
List of tables List of figures Preface
xi xiii INTRODUCTION
Introduction I The first period of the denarius coinage The mint of Rome Mints outside Rome The denarius coinage The date of the denarius II III
The pre-denarius coinage The second century - relative chronology c. 206-c. 144 B.C. (nos. 112-221) c. 143-c. 125 B.C. (nos. 222-72) c. 124-c. 92 B.C. (nos. 273-336)
IV The second century - absolute chronology V The first century 91-79 B.C. (Table XII) 78-49 B.C. (Table xin) 49-45 B.C. (Table xiv) 44-31 B.C. (Tables XV-XVII) Appendix: Relative arrangement of quadrigatus issues
1
3 8 12
24 28
35 47 47
55 65 71
75 75 82
89 94 103
CATALOGUE Note on use of the Catalogue
123
Abbreviations used and works cited in headings of the Catalogue
123
Collections cited in the Catalogue
126
Catalogue Appendix Modern forgeries Mis-read coins Plated coins Unofficial issues of bronze coins
131
547 548 553 560
565
Contents
VOLUME II
page 569 569 576 589
1 Technique and technology Metal Struck coins Cast coins (280-212 B.C.)
2 Weight standards The Roman pound Ascertaining weight standards Gold Silver Bronze
590 590 592 593 594 595
3 Monetary magistrates Moneyers Monetary magistrates other than moneyers Military issues
598 598 603 604
4 Special formulae Issues struck from Argentum publicum Issues struck by Senatus consultant
605 605 606
5 Administration and control The people The Senate The mint Magistrates
610 610 616 618 620
6 Roman units of reckoning under the Republic Sestertius Silver and bronze Victoriatus Roman coinage in Livy Nummus
621 621
7 Coinage and finance
633 634 640 694
Inopia Size of issues of coinage Income and expenditure VI
625 628 630 632
Contents 8 Careers of the moneyers
708
9 Types and legends Public types Private types Approach to empire
712 713 725 734
10 Art and coinage
745
Addenda
751 PLATES
Plates
755
Key to the plates
757
Bibliography
797
Concordances
820
Indices
859
Types Legends Sources Persons General
859 879 890 903 912
vu
TABLES VOLUME I
I
The first period of denarius coinage - 211-207 B.C.
II in iv v VI VII vm ix x xi xil
211-207 B.C. - victoriati 211-207B.C. -denarii, quinarii and sestertii 211-207 B.C.-bronze The pre-denarius coinage c. 2$o-c. 212 B.C. Early second-century denarius coinage 207-c. 170 B.C. - victoriati 207-144 B.C. - denarii 207-146 B.C. - bronze Coinage 143-125 B.C. Coinage 124-92 B.C. Coinage 91-79 B.C. Coinage 78-49 B.C. Coinage 49-45 B.C. The moneyers 44-c. 40 B.C. The Pompeians 44-c. 40 B.C. The Caesarians 43-31 B.C. Overstrikes Control-marks on didrachms with Roma/Victory ROMANO Control-marks on denarii of C. Allius Bala Control-marks on quinarii of L. Piso Frugi Control-marks on asses of Q. Titius Control-marks on denarii of C. Vibius Pansa (1) Control-marks on denarii of C. Vibius Pansa (3a-b) Control-symbols on quinarii of M. Cato Control-symbols on denarii of L. Titurius Sabinus Control-marks on second issue of denarii of C. Censorinus Control-marks on denarii of Gargonius, etc.
XIII
xiv xv xvi XVII XVIII
xix XX xxi XXII XXIII
xxiv xxv xxvi XXVII
xxvm
ix
page 4 25 26 27 44 49 53 56 58 60 66 76 84 90 96 97 98 105 138 337 342 345 349 349 350 354 358 364
Tables XXIX XXX XXXI XXXII XXXIII
Control-marks on denarii of L. Censorinus Control-marks on denarii of C. Valerius Flaccus Control-marks on denarii of C. Annius Control-marks on denarii of L. Volumnius Strabo Control-marks on denarii of C. Marius Capito
Control-marks XXXV Control-marks XXXVI Control-marks XXXVII Control-marks XXXVIII Control-marks XXXIV
on denarii of M. Volteius on denarii of M. Volteius on denarii of L. Plaetorius on denarii of Q. Pomponius Rufus on denarii of Q. Crepereius Rocus
page 378 380 382 391 392 400 401
408 410 411
Control-marks on denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus Control-marks on denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus Control-marks on denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus
415 415 416 420
XLIII
Control-marks on denarii of C. Piso Frugi Control-marks on denarii of C. Piso Frugi
XLIV
Control-marks on denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus
436
XXXIX XL XLI XLII
VOLUME XLV XLVI XLVII XLVIII XLIX L LI LII LIII LIV LV LVI LVII LVIII LIX LX LXI LXII
424
II
Analyses of silver coins Analyses of plated silver coins Analyses of bronze coins As and sestertius Growth in volume of production of as Size of denarius issues 157-31 B.C. Size of quinarius issues 101-31 B.C. Size of sestertius issues 91-44 B.C. Size of didrachm and drachm issues Size of denarius, quinarius and sestertius issues 211-158 B.C. Size of late gold issues Size of early gold issues Size of bronze issues of denarius coinage Coinage and expenditure from 157 to 50 B.C. Careers of the moneyers Types of aes grave Types of moneyers under Caesar Portraiture in the Republican coinage
570
573 574 623 627 642 674 675 676 677 688 691 692
696 708 717
737 746
FIGURES 1 Form of trophy on victoriati of Metellus (no. 132/1)
page 50
2 Form of superstructure of prow on bronze of C. Saxula, etc. 50
(nos. 173-7) 3 Pattern of control-marks of P. Crepusius (no. 361/1)
376
4 Shapes of blanks used for struck bronze coins
580
5 Relationship between hoard specimens and obverse dies
673
XI
avec les livres sans les medailles on peut scavoir beaucoup et scavoir bien, et avec les medailles sans les livres on scaura peu et 1'on scaura mal Abb6 Geinoz, quoted by A. D . Momigliano, Contributo alia storia degli studi classici, 86 n. 31
1 TECHNIQUE AND TECHNOLOGY The coinages of the ancient world, including that of the Roman Republic, are remarkable in that they were, unlike most other artefacts, mass-produced. I do not wish here to discuss the larger problems raised by the level of Greek and Roman technology,1 but it seems desirable to describe as fully and accurately as possible the techniques used by the Republican mint. I
METAL
The Republic coined at one time or another in gold, silver and a variety of copper alloys; the metals are best considered in this order. Analyses of Republican gold have only once, as far as I know, been attempted; both diey and specific gravity measurements suggest that a very high degree of purity was maintained.2 The same was on the whole true of silver.3 The Republican treasury knew how to test for purity of silver (Livy xxxii, 2, 1-2), and the analyses in Table XLV reveal deliberate debasement only during the Second Punic War (6-8), during the fighting between Marius and the Sullans (26-7) and in the coinage of M. Antonius, notably in the Legionary series (49-62). The debasement of the Second Punic War is reported by Zonaras (viii, 26,14, under the year 217, but not explicidy dated), that of M. Antonius is probably mentioned by Pliny (NH xxxiii, 132, miscuit denario triumvir Antonius ferrum, Antonius as Triumvir mixed iron into his denarii, where ferrum must be an error for aes, since silver and iron are virtually immiscible;4 there is no reason to suppose that the passage refers to plating on iron, see p. 560 n. 1). The analytical evidence for the debasement of the coinage of L. Rubrius Dossenus is corroborated by the frequent occurrence in hoards which I have seen of denarii of Dossenus covered with verdigris.5 Pliny's ascription of a plan to debase the silver coinage to M. Livius Drusus, Tr. Pi. 91 (see p. 616), may preserve a garbled 1 1
9 4 8
See L. Edelstein, Journ. Hist. Ideas 1952, 573; M. I Finley, Ec. Hist. Rev. 1965, 29; H. W. Pleket, Ada Hist. Neerlandica 1967, 1; also G. W. Reecc, Greece and Rome 1969, 32. P. Meyers, Archaeometry 1969,74, for analyses; E. R.Caley, Ohio Journal of Science 1949, 73, discussing specific gravity, mentions an aureus of A. Hirtius (no. 466) with 99 % gold content. F. Schiassi, Ritrovamento di medaglie, 33, is wrongly cited in this connection by J. Hammer, ZfN 1908, 67. The detailed figures discussed here are supported by the figures for the bulk analysis of 87 denarii and 8 quinarii given by A. von Rauch, ZfN 1874, 34. The proposal of I. Cazzaniga, PdelP 1967, 366, to emend the passage should not be accepted. A. Santarelli, Ripostiglio di denari, 7, remarks that in the Pieve Quinta hoard there were 'alcune pochissime (monete) delle famiglie Carisia, Marcia e Rubria investite di ossido di rame'. I have noticed this feature only on coins of L. Rubrius Dossenus and its occurrence on other coins in the Pieve Quinta hoard may be casual.
569
Technique and technology TABLE XLV.
No.
Issue Apollo/Horse ROMA 1 Quadrigatus
1 2
Base Reference %Ar %Au metal 26/1
3 4 5 Half-quadrigatus 6 Quadrigatus (debased)2 7 „ 8 9 Anonymous denarius 1O
n
Anonymous victoriatus
12
Anonymous denarius
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24
25 26 27 28
222/1
„
224/1 228/2 232/1
M. Marcius M. Philus L. Licinius, etc. Anonymous denarius
245/1 281/1 282/4 287/1
98 99 99 99 99 80 60 30 98.60 98.80 879340 98.60 99-37 97.50
— — — — — — — — — 0.700.90 — 0.48 049
9840 0.03 over — 96.00 99-5O 97.90 98.90 over 96.00 98.50 98.80
0.04 0.12 0.33 —
0.40 289/1 — 329/1 340/1 9840 0.12 342/5D 94.87 —
M. Cato L. Dossenus
343/1 348/1 348/2 350A/I
29
u
30
M
Q.C.M.P.I. L. Papius L. Flaccus C. Postumius P. Ypsaeus, etc. C. Servilius
37 Faustus 38
97.70 93.00 91.20 98.39
— 0.48 0.10 —
35OA/2 95.80 —
„
374/1 384/i 387/1 394/1 422/1 423/1
„
95.50 92.60 97.00 95.10 98.60 99.07
Method Cupellation
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.15 2.01 1-57 — 046 1.98 0.77 —
Source von Rauch 1874 von Rauch 1857
u
Bahrfeldt
„
„
X-ray fluorescence Cupellation
„ 9)
„
X-ray fluorescence Cupellation
„ „
X-ray
von Rauch 1857 Reece Carter von Rauch 1857 Thomson
BM
„
Stoicovici
BM
„ Stoicovici
fluorescence
M. Cipius Lentulus L. Frugi C. Pansa
„
33 34 35 36
44/1
L. Iulius C. Flaccus Cn. Gellius
Gargonius, e t c
31 32
Analyses of silver coins
—
— — 0.57 — — —
426/3 95-20 — 426/48 98.20 —
1
1.10 —
148 — — 6.52 8.70 —
— — — — — — — — —
Cupellation
„ M
BM Schiassi
BM
Cupellation and KeUner spectrographic analysis Schiassi Cupellation
„ M
BM
„
Cupellation and KeUner spectrographic analysis Schiassi Cupellation
» n
„ „
» M
Reece
BM
Reece Schiassi Cupellation and KeUner spectrographic analysis Schiassi Cupellation
„
»
This coin may be identified as no. 26/1,ratherthan as no. 15/1, because of its weight of 6-2 gr. * See also H. Dressel, Beschreibung iii, 168, nos. 32-8.
570
Metal TABLE XLV (coitt.)
No.
Reference
Issue
98.00 — 97.00 — 97.00 — 39 C. Restio 455/1 92.50 — Caesar 468/1-298.60 — Palicanus 473/2 95.40 — L. Buca 480/4 95.40 — M. Antonius 489/6 95.50 — P. Clodius 494/23 94.50-0.7096.70 0.90 > M. Antonius 92.49 0.10 M. Antonius LEG II 544/14 85.50 — LEG II 544/14 90.10 — LEG III » 544/15 85.10 — LEG III » 544/15 77-62 — LEG III 544/15 83.80 — LEG V 544/18 89.50 — 93 LEG VII 544/20 90.60 — 99 LEG VIII 544/21 83.95 — 33 LEG VIIII 544/22 89.75 — 93
39 A. Plautius 40 41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
0/ /o Base %Ar %Au metal
431/1 443/1 443/1
Caesar
99 99 99 33 99
LEG X LEG XI LEG XIII LEG XV LEG XX
83.80 83.80 85.60 87.40 544/36 87.30
544/24 544/25 544/27 544/30
— — — — —
Method Cupellation
— — — — — — — — — — 4-73
99 99 99 99 99
99
X-ray fluorescence Cupellation 99 99
99 99 99 99
Carter Bibra Schiassi Giesecke Reece Giesecke von Rauch 1857 Giesecke 99
Akerman Cupellation and Kellner spectrographic analysis von Rauch 1857 Cupellation 99
99 99 99
—
von Rauch 1857 Schiassi 99
—
— — 11-94
99
BM
99
99
— —
Schiassi von Rauch 1857
39
20.71 8.14 6.95
Source
99
99
Giesecke Schiassi Reece
The analyses collected here are clearly of varying accuracy; in any case none can hope to tell us the exact composition of the coin as it was immediately after striking, largely owing to the effects of corrosion and diffusion over the centuries (see J. Condamin and M. Picon, Archaeometry 1964, 98; 1965,110). It appears, however, that the margin of inaccuracy is not likely to be large with the straightforward destruction analysis of coins of high silver content (see L. H. Cope, NC 1967,109); I therefore regard the analyses collected here as substantially accurate. The following sources have been used: J. Y. Akerman, Catalogue of Roman coins i, xiv. M. Bahrfeldt, 'Monete romano-campane', no. 17c!. E. Bibra, Vber alte Eisen- und Silber-funde, 37, no. 1. B(ritish) M(useum) unpublished analyses, commissioned by H. Mattingly, recorded on tickets beneath coins (see, briefly, J. Phelps, Reports of the Royal Mint 1938, 55). G. F. Carter, Analytical chemistry 1964, 1264. W. Giesecke, Italia Numismatica, 325. H.-J. Kellner and W. Specht, JNG 1961, 43. A. von Rauch, Mitt. Num. Ges. Berlin iii, 1857, 295. A. von Rauch, ZfN 1874, 32, no. 18. R. Reece, NC 1964, 233. F. Schiassi, Ritrovamento di medaglie consolari, 34. E. Stoicovicd and I. Winkler, Acta Mus. Napoc. 1967, 449. Th. Thomson, Arm. Ckirme bad, 1809, 129 and 132. I have not been able to use one analysis by Akerman and two by von Rauch, since the coins are not fully identified.
571
Technique and technology reminiscence of the debasement of the coinage by Dossenus in 87; but Pliny's confusions can rarely be resolved with any certainty. I take it that all serious debasement of the precious metal coinage of the Roman Republic was the result of financial stringency. It is apparent that after the debasement of the Second Punic War the quality of the silver coinage was restored to as high a level as could be expected in the ancient world. The quality of the firstcentury coinage is uneven, but this is best explained as the result of melting down for re-use coins which might be debased without taking sufficient care; the bronze coinage was much more carelessly produced (see below). The composition of other silver coinages of the Qvil War period than that of M. Antonius could profitably be investigated; for the bronze coinage of this period is erratic in both composition and weight-standard; and at least one silver coinage, that of Scarpus, is of reduced weight-standard (see p. 595). Two points connected with the metal content of the silver coinage remain to be discussed, the second of which is perhaps not strictly relevant, but is best considered here. First, six analyses (11, 24, 28, 36, 47 and 57) include an account of the trace elements present. Analyses have also been carried out solely with a view to determining trace elements.1 Unfortunately it seems unlikely that such investigations can be very informative. At least from the First Punic War onwards the Roman Republic and its officials were in receipt of booty and revenue from a wide variety of sources. Assorted coins and bullion presumably went together into the melting-pot to emerge as coinage. Only for Rome's first two silver issues does it seem possible that investigation of the trace elements which they contain might reveal the source of the metal used. Second, a number of analyses of plated coins have been carried out. Since these cannot be regarded as official mint products (see p. 560), the analyses are shown separately in Table XLVI. One analysis (2, dealing only widi the base metal core) includes an account of the trace elements present. The most interesting analysis deals separately with the core and the plating (3); the fairly respectable quality of the silver plating2 confirms the inference to be drawn from the Lucoli hoard, consisting largely of fragments of silver denarii ready to be melted down and of newly manufactured plated denarii, that forgers used official denarii to provide the metal for their silver plating. By contrast with the gold and silver coinage, the bronze coinage of the Republic was throughout of erratic composition and often of poor quality, as appears from Table XLVII. Copper was alloyed with lead as well as with tin from a very early stage, doubtless because lead could cost only 7/80 as much as tin (Pliny, NH xxxiv, 161); sometimes lead displaced tin altogether (17, 18 etc.). The wild fluctuations in composition are best understood as the result of melting down old coins without 1 G. Rolandi and F. Cremascoli, Industria Mineraria 1953, 255. * Observed also by E. Bernareggi, RIN 1965, 15; for similar analysis results see M. Bahrfeldt, Antike MUnztechnik, pp. 14-15 of offprint.
572
Metal TABLE XLVI.
No. 1
2 3 4
Issue Quadrigatus
Denarius (core) C. Norbanus (total) (plate)
M. Antonius
Reference
Analyses of plated silver coins 7o Base % Ar % Au metal
less than 33-3 second — century 357/ib 21.50 357/ib 91.80 488/1-218.00
Method
Source
—
—
—
99.05
9)
Bibra
Cu — —
ii
Reece
— — —
82.00
Cupellation
von Rauch 1874
}>
»
Akerman
For the sources used see notes to Table XLV.
imposing any kind of quality control,1 such as did exist for silver.2 It is worth recalling in this context the Roman readiness to overstrike old coins without even bothering to melt them down and make new blanks. Only with the adoption of orichalcum, a copper and zinc alloy,3 as a coinage metal was any attempt made to control die composition of the base metal coinage. Occurring sporadically earlier,4 orichalcum was used as a coinage metal by C. Clovius in 45 with a zinc content of some 28 %j also by Q. Oppius at an uncertain date with a rather lower percentage of zinc (39-41 and 46-7). Zinc also began to appear in a number of provincial coinages,5 doubdess because coins of C. Clovius were melted down to make them. Orichalcum was finally adopted by Augustus for his sestertii and dupondii.6 Although the relationship between orichalcum and copper under Augustus does not provide decisive evidence for their exact relationship earlier, it is clear that orichalcum was from the beginning regarded as more valuable than copper or bronze. The coins of C. Clovius, weighing as much as asses in circulation or being struck at the time, were thus certainly intended at least as dupondii. 1
Though it is worth noting that the substitution of striking for casting from 217 onwards led initially to an improvement in the quality of the bronze coinage, see Table XLVII, 4-7 and 9. The Cambridge analyses showed an increasing proportion of arsenic as the second century progressed. 2 See above and, for Imperial silver, L. H. Cope, NC 1967, 107-20. ' H. A. Grueber, BMCRR i, xxxiv; ii, 45, 350, 368, 385, 412, 454, 504, 512, 532, 538, is uniformly confused on the nature of orichalcum, being unaware of the necessity of zinc as an ingredient. ' E. R. Caley, Orichalcum, 3-8 and 13-31. 5 E. R. Caley, Orichalcum, 9. • For the process of manufacture see E. R. Caley, Orichalcum, 9 2 - 9 ; for the reputation of the metal in antiquity see LSJ, s.vv. 6PE(XO<XKOS and KOCBUEIO:; TLL, s . w . aurichalcum and cadmea.
573
Technique and technology TABLE XLVII.
No. Issue
Reference
Libra! as Libral semis 3 Libral quadrans 4 Semilibral semuncia 5 Collateral quadrans
10
Collateral semuncia Corn-ear Corn-ear1
I Anchor
Corn-ear and f^J 12 Corn-ear and tv 13 Corn-ear and f^
n
14 15
Corn-ear Corn-ear
16
Corn-ear Star Thunderbolt Meta Metellus
17 18 19 20
Tampilus Matienus 23 Matienus 24 A. Caecilius 25 Gryphon 21 22
26 27 28 29 30
Wolf and twins P. Blasio Opeimius Murena Anchor
Star Ass 33 C. Scribonius 34 Mast and sail 35 Q. Libo
31 32
36 37 38 39 40
L. Pitio C. Curiatius L. Tubulus C. Clovius C. Clovius 1 3
%Cu %Sn %Pb Mg 7 8 7
88
12
•
90
9
42/2 42/4 43/5 50/4
93 92
67 95 58
5 8 9 4 11
31
69/5 69/5 69/6 72/7 72/7
89
10
81
3 7
1 16 20
•
1
72/7 113/2 119/6 124/6 132/3 133/7 162/3 i62/5b 174/1 182/1
73
Ca
Mn
Fe
29 20 . 1
• 24 1
100
99 100
21
79
8
92
72
3 3
14 25
77
2
72
72
3 3 7 •
21 25 18 25 28
83
79 68 62
7
76 86 77 88
1
5
9
1
17 11
196/1 195/1 201/3 213/1 215/3
65
5
2i6/2a 240/2b 315/1
183/1 189/4 190/1 186/1 194/1
Si
22
70 62 72
1 2
6 7 8 9
Analyses of bronze coins
31 23
6
30 30 28 28 26
70
72 71
1
74
•
65 68
2
92
22 26 1
5 6
75 71
Although this piece belongs to the corn-ear issue, the corn-ear is not aaually present on it. This piece is overstnick on a coin of Rhegium, see Table rvm, 63, b.
574
• • •
Metal
Co
Ni
• • •
• • • •
Zn
As
Ag
•
Sb
.
S
/
V . . .
Au
.
Method
Source
Wet analysis
Phillips
Wet analysis and spectrography Cambridge Spectrography „
•
Wet analysis and spectrography Spectrography
/
.
.
.
Wet analysis Spectrography
• .
• .
• .
. .
Wet analysis and spectrography Spectrography
„ „
Caley Cambridge
u M
•
• •
NONE
• •
• • •
•
•
NONE X-ray fluorescence Carter Wet analysis and spectrography Cambridge Wet analysis „
23 29
575
Giesecke Bahrfeldt
Technique and technology TABLE XLVII (COM.) No. Issue
Reference
C. Clovius Sex. Pompeius 43 Sex. Pompeius 44 Octavian 45 Octavian
41 42
46 Q. Oppius 47 Q. Oppius
%Cu % Sn %Pb
Mg
Si
Ca
Mn
Fe
71
74
8
71
10
79
8 4
81
16 19 13 14
79 84
Quantitative analyses by means of spectrography and X-ray fluorescence should not be regarded as being particularly accurate, especially in view of the unevenness in composition of ancient bronze coins; the accuracy of the analyses collected seems, however, sufficient to support the points made in the text (above, pp. 6-7). The following sources have been used: M. Bahrfeldt, NZ 1905, 42. E. R. Caley, Composition of Greek bronze coins, 104. Cambridge unpublished analyses, commissioned by myself (I should like to thank the Fitzwilliam Museum Syndicate for permission to analyse spectrographically 30 pieces, of which 2 are unofficial imitations and are not listed here; 5 pieces were provided by myself, for wet analysis; I should also II
STRUCK COINS
The four possible sources of information concerning the technique of striking coins are the coins themselves, surviving pieces of coining equipments representations of coining equipment or processes and literary or epigraphic testimonia. These last are very few and far between, while the third of the sources mentioned has very serious drawbacks. The activity of coin-production shaded into jewellery in one direction and metal-working in the other and it is rarely possible to tell from a relief or painting whether coining or some related activity is represented. Such uncertain representations in any case tell us no more than is suggested by common-sense and by the five certain representations of coining equipment or processes; the odiers are best ignored.1 The value as evidence of surviving dies is even less than that of representations. Although it is difficult to be certain that all surviving ancient dies are forgers' dies, they should certainly all be viewed with grave suspicion. All Republican examples but one seem to be forgers' dies (see p. 562 n. 3) and the same seems to be true of the large number of early Imperial examples, whether of bronze (for striking gold and silver) or of iron (for striking copper or copper alloys).2 The great preponderance of bronze dies (for striking gold and silver) seems to me best 1
Representations of coining equipment and processes are collected by C. C. Vermeule, Ancient dies, 10-37; reasonably certain representations are nos. 4, 1, 7, 11 and 12 in Vermeule's list (no. 7 is now in the British Museum, see B. Ashmole, BMQ 1955, 71 with pi. xxiii); uncertain representations are nos. 2-3, 5-6, 8-10 in Vermeule's list and a clay plaque frcm Alexandria in the Ashmolean Museum illustrated in Archaeology 1957, 100. * The distinction is based on the size of the dies.
576
Struck coins
Co
Ni
Zn
As
Ag
Sb
Au
Method
Source
Wet analysis „ „ „ „
Bahrfeldt Phillips Grueber Phillips Grueber
„
Bahrfeldt
like to thank Dr K. M. Bowkett and Mr K. I. Bullman, both formerly Department of Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, for carrying out and evaluating the analyses). G. F. Carter, Analytical chemistry 1964, 1264. W. Giesecke, Italia Numismatica, 351. H. A. Grueber, NC 1904, 244. J. A. Phillips, J. Chem. Soc. 1852, 265. I have not been able to use one analysis by Phillips and one by Bibra (see notes to Table XLV), since the coins are not fully identified. The analyses discussed by E. Bernareggi, RIN 1964, 7, are no use at all for scientific purposes, since the coins are not identified at all.
explained by the assumption that forgers concentrated on counterfeiting precious metal coins (for the method seep. 560 n. 1); Vermeule's view1 that the mint was less careful about dies for striking gold and silver is incredible. There is in any case no universally valid way of distinguishing between forgers' dies and official dies (see pp. 561-2). It is perhaps just worth stating the probability that official dies were made from the same materials as forgers' dies, namely bronze for striking gold and silver, iron for striking base metals. The most important source of evidence, in the end, for die techniques used by the mints of the Roman Republic is the coins themselves. The preparation of dies Each obverse and reverse die for the Republican coinage appears to have been individually cut;2 there is no evidence that any attempt was made to mass-produce dies, eidier by casting or by 'hubbing', that is by striking dies in intaglio from a master die in relief. Cast dies involve a loss of detail and crispness which can be documented for forgers' dies for plated silver coinage,3 but of which no trace appears on the official, pure silver coinage of the Roman Republic; they may be left out of account. Various processes of'hubbing' are postulated by those who hold they were 1
Ancient dies, 40.
1
The techniques and presumably the tools were the same as for cutting gems in intaglio; for a discussion of the tools used see S. Casson, Congress 1936, 40-52; the use of both drill and compass may be documented for Republican dies - the former was apparently used to mark the ends of the straight lines of the letters in the legends (see, for instance, PI. xxxv, 1), the latter was used to mark out the circular border (M. Bahrfeldt, Antike MOnztechnik, p. 18 of offprint). Seep. 561.
1
577
Technique and technology used in the classical world; basically, we are asked to believe either that a master die only blocked out the salient features of the design or that it created a perfect die, perhaps with lettering to be added. I do not see how satisfactory evidence for the first process can ever be produced and propose to ignore it. 1 1 do not believe that die second process was operated under the Republic. Dies with mistakes were carefully corrected2 and dies were recut; so die obverse die of N. Fabius Pictor widi die control-letter G (no. 268/lb) and so several obverse dies of Cn. and Sex. Pompeius (nos. 470 and 477).° Aldiough correction of mistakes on dies is perhaps not incompatible with the use of 'hubbing', bodiering to re-cut dies is surely incompatible widi die possibility of producing new dies by die simple use of a master die.4 The metal from which a die was made was doubdess work-hardened by being hammered before die process of engraving was begun; obverse dies could apparendy produce about 30,000 coins each (see p. 694), reverse dies rather less. The artists The number of engravers5 employed in die mint at any one time was, I diink, very few. The gigantic issue of L. Iulius Bursio displays two distinct styles in its obverse dies (see Pi. XLVI, 11-12; die reverses are not really susceptible of stylistic analysis), presumably the work eidier of two artists or of two groups of artists; since die whole issue was struck as a single sequence (see commentary on no. 352), we cannot really postulate two groups of artists working in isolation; it is necessary to regard die two styles as those of two individual artists, each dierefore responsible for some 200 obverse dies in half a year (to die rest of the year belongs die issue of Mn. Fonteius, the dies for which were also cut by die same two artists).6 The reverse dies for part of die issue of D. Silanus can widi some plausibility be assigned to three engravers (see commentary on no. 337); they may reasonably be supposed to have cut all die other dies between them. The mint was apparendy as an experiment from 135 to 124 divided into two teams functioning in alternate years (see p. 65); in diis puzzling arrangement each team apparendy had only one engraver whose distinctive style appears on both silver and bronze (compare, most dramatically, Pis. xxxvi, 14 and 15, xxxvii, 2 and 3). 1
It is worth noting that just two obverse dies, with the control marks XXXVI and IXL, of the second type of L. Lucretius Trio (no. 390/2) have very small heads; inspection of specimens struck from them suffices to show that each die was individually cut. 1 See on nos. 246/43, 390/2, 437/4b, 494/27 and 528/3; M. Bahrfeldt, Antike Miinztechnik, p. 15 of offprint, notices the phenomenon, but describes it slightly inaccurately in the case of the first example. * Note also the vicissitudes of the control-letters on no. 480/3 and 17 (see below, p. 588 n. 3). 4 N. Durr, Musees dt Geneve Juillet-Aout 1963, 11, argues for the third century A.D. that Roman dies were normally produced by 'hubbing'. See also my discussion in general terms in A. D. Momigliano (ed.), Sources of ancient history (forthcoming). 8 Signatores in ILS 1635, scalptores in ILS 1638; the terms were presumably interchangeable. • The two styles run side by side from no. 352 to no. 394, see commentary on no. 388. For the time needed to produce a die see H. Zehnacker, FestschxiftJ.Vogt i, 1, 278-9; P. Grierson, Numismatics, 110.
578
Struck coins It follows that I am not wholly convinced by the theory that the mint included an 'erster Graveur' who produced one or more patterns and a number of hacks who turned out the bulk of the dies; 1 there are certainly issues which show one or two fine dies and a large number of poor-quality dies (as no. 343); but I believe that sometimes one and the same man could produce a few fine dies and could then allow his engraving to deteriorate under pressure of work.2 Nor do I believe that eight separate engravers produced the eighteen (or so) obverse dies used for the Triumviral portrait gold of 42.3 As far as we can tell, the same engravers worked on dies for all three metals, where appropriate (see above for bronze and silver; for silver and gold compare Pi. XLVII, 6 and 7). The same engravers also seem often to have cut bodi obverse and reverse dies and boda design and lettering; the erroneous repetition of M. CATO on one reverse die of no. 343/2b suggests that it was being cut by a man who also cut obverse dies; and on the obverse dies of the issue of P. Satrienus a particular style correlates widi a distinctive way of composing Roman numerals (see commentary on no. 388).* Issues such as no. 342/1-2 show obverse and reverse almost as interchangeable. The preparation of blanks No examples survive of blanks intended for coins of the Roman Republic;5 it is clear, however, diat a number of different methods of manufacture were used, sometimes simultaneously,6 quite apart, of course, from the mere re-use of existing coins for overstriking. The methods to leave most traces are those used for die bronze coinage from 217 onwards. Two-sided moulds, with a number of interconnected compartments, were employed. The point at which the two sides of a mould joined might be either in the middle of the rim of the blank or at one edge of the rim, widi the result that a blank might have one of two characteristic profiles (see Fig. 4,2-3) ;7 obviously 1
A. Alfoldi, SNR 1954, 9; also H. Zehnacker, RN 1961, 33. 3 T. V. Buttrey, Portrait gold, 29-31. * Styles D and E of no. 342/5 suggest an extra engraver. * Of course, obverse and reverse dies may sometimes have been cut by different men; the different approaches to spelling on no. 403/1 perhaps suggest this, also that one of the men concerned was Greek. For Greek artistic conceptions in the Republican coinage see also p. 725 n. 2. We have only one real artist's signature, the letter P concealed in the hair on the head of M. Antonius on no. 542/1-2 (first pointed out in the sale catalogue Santamaria 21/11/1920, 177 and 184). I am wholly unconvinced by the attempts of M.-L. Vollenweider in Steinschneidekunst to identify gem-cutters with particular die-cutters; on p. 27 the gems of Pamphilos, homogeneous in style, are held to resemble very diverse coins ranging in date from the early 60s to the late 40s; in fact, the resemblance hardly goes beyond the fact that in each case female heads are portrayed (cf. P. Zazoff, Gnomon 1969, 198). 6 For examples from other coinages see G. F. Hill, NC 1922, 7 n. 14; 11 nn. 28-9. 1 The officinatores of ILS 1634-5, cf. 1636, CIL vi, 1145, were presumably the mint personnel concerned with the process; the nummularii of ILS 1636-7, cf. CIL vi, 8463, were presumably concerned with problems of metal content, the aequator of ILS 1639 with the weight of blanks. ' The following issues are found with the profile of Figure 4, 2 - struck bronze from no. 38 to no. 219 (with five exceptions, see below) and occasional semisses thereafter; asses from no. 312 to no. 329. The following issues are found with the profile of Figure 4, 3 - struck bronze from no. 97 to no. 100 and part of the struck bronze of no. 89; most fractions from no. 226 onwards; asses from no. 290 to no. 296 and from no. 334 to no. 355. The as of Sulla (no. 368) reverts to the profile of Figure 4, 2.
579
Technique and technology a great deal of variety within each type is possible; if the mould was not fitted together properly the profile may be deformed (see Fig. 4,4). The lugs formed by die metal in the interconnecting channels were often not broken off and remained attached to one or other of die blanks (see Fig. 4,1). The whole method of making blanks for the struck bronze coinage was presumably taken over from die techniques used for the cast bronze coinage (see below).
2
3
4
Fig. 4. Shapes of blanks used for struck bronze coins.
Blanks for gold and silver coins were apparendy prepared from 269 onwards (no. 20) by filling depressions in an open mould with molten metal.1 The resulting slugs of metal were then hammered to the desired diameter for die dies currendy in use and re-heated to reverse the work-hardening effect. The blanks for die token bronze coinage produced between 241 and 226 were made in the same way as those for the gold and silver coinage. The blanks for Rome's first two issues of didrachms and dieir associated token bronze were to all appearances prepared in a way that was familiar to Greek mints in South Italy; each was cast in a spherical two-sided mould and then struck in such a way that the join was obliterated by the type on each side, remaining visible only at two points on the edge.2 1
2
There is never any trace of the join left by a two-sided mould. Depressions in an open mould could be filled either by pouring from a ladle (difficult) or by melting scraps making up the right weight in situ (see A. Barb, NZ 1930,1; M. F. Hendy and J. A. Charles, Archaeometry 1970, 17). I know of one silver coin where a scrap protruding from the edge seems to reveal the use of this process, a piece in an unpublished hoard of late quadrigati from Montedoro in the Museo Nazionale di Taranto. G. F. Hill, NC 1922, 6-7; the blanks for no. 23 were apparently made in the same way (thus copying the contemporary coinage of the mint of Messana at which they were produced, see p. 40 and M. Sarstrom, Coinage of the Mamertines, 21).
58O
Struck coins
Serration At intervals through almost the whole course of the denarius coinage, from its inception down to the mid-sixties, the denarii of certain issues or parts of issues were provided with serrated edges.1 The serration was done by hand with a chisel before striking.2 Unfortunately the purpose remains obscure. The view of H. Mattingly that denarii serrati were the coinage of the Marians3 was demolished by E. A. Sydenham;* but the latter's view that they were struck at non-Italian mints, primarily for Transalpine circulation, cannot stand either. There is one example of a denarius of an issue normally serrated which is struck on an unserrated blank regarded by Sydenham as characteristic of the mint of Rome (denarius of Mn. Aquillius, no. 401/1, Rome, Capitol 1112); and there is one serrated example of that part of the issue of C. Egnatius Maxsumus which is not normally serrated (no. 391/3, Copenhagen, from die same reverse die as a normal piece). Clearly serrated and unserrated denarii were being produced not only at the same time, but in the same place, with occasional confusion of blanks. Since serration was not systematic, it could not prevent forgery, for a forger could choose which issue to copy; we are left with the likelihood that serration was no more than a casual decorative fashion.5 Trial pieces6 It seems that dies were sometimes tested before being used for a production run. There survive a hybrid piece in base metal of C. Numonius Vaala,7 a version in bronze of an aureus of L. Livineius Regulus,8 a piece of lead with the types of a denarius of M. Fourius Philus impressed on either side (Haeberlin 696) and a piece of bronze with the reverse type of a quadrans of L. Piso Frugi impressed on it three times (Paris, A 7046) ;9 the last piece is interesting and will be discussed below. In general, there is no way of telling what the purpose of trial pieces was - to show how the product of particular dies looked or to test whether the machinery as a whole was working. 1
Nos. 79 (cf. Ailly, Recherches ii, 556), 202 (cf. M. Bahrfeldt, Bull. Memuel de Num. 1883-84, 133), 282, etc. For a full list see General Index. For issues wrongly regarded in the past as serrate see pp. 551 (four coins) and 553. 1 H. Mattingly, JVC 1924, 32-3; E. A. Sydenham, NC 1935. 229-30; M. Bahrfeldt, Antike MiXmtechnik, pp. 11-12 of offprint, is in error. » JRS 1922, 234-6; NC 1924, 46-52. • NC 1935, 211-12. 1 So H. A. Grueber, BMCRR i, 159. Note the way in which serration is one element of artistic continuity in the issues which precede and follow Sulla's capture of Rome in 82, see p. 79. • L. Cesano, Rass. Num. 1907, 57, deals with Imperial examples. ' Obverse of no. 514/2, reverse of no. 514/1 -Paris, A 13311 (same obverse die as a normal denarius, Paris, AF). * T. V. Buttrey, Portrait gold, 66-7. ' M. Bahrfeldt, Nachtrage iii, pi. ii, 43. There are two other supposed trial pieces, a small plaque bearing a head of Mercury with a caduceus over his shoulder, SEPVLLIVS and (?) Q, (J.-A. Blanchet, RN 1898, 122), and a block of silver with the obverse type (without inscription) of a denarius of L. Aquillius Floras on either side (R. Mowat, RIN 1903, 385). The second piece is a modern forgery (M. Bahrfeldt, Nachtrage iii, 21), the first does not reproduce a coin type.
581
Technique and technology The process of striking1 The anvil and punch dies tested, cased and ready, a heated blank2 was placed on die anvil die by a suppostor by means of tongs, die punch die held in place by two malliatores and a hammer wielded by a third malliator? The dies were not, under die Roman Republic, in any way fixed in relation to each other, but die malliatores seem in fact often to have kept them in much die same position for a long time, presumably for die whole of a shift; coins struck from die same pair of dies normally show die dies in the same position.4 The picture is of a mint using dies intensively to produce a large volume of coinage and exhausting one or other die in a relatively short time (see below). Coins struck from die same pair of dies but showing die dies in a different position may be regarded as produced in different shifts or as die result of momentary carelessness. Of some importance is die probability that die mint, for the sake of increased productivity, struck several coins simultaneously. The Augustan as illustrated by J.-B. Giard5 seems to result from die placing of a blank in such a way that it was struck by parts of two obverse and two reverse dies mounted side by side.6 And although it is difficult to be certain, die trial piece for quadrantes of L. Piso Frugi mentioned above seems impressed by diree different dies, again presumably mounted side by side.7 Certainly the occasional occurrence of coins with the die on one side centred and that on die other side not is readily understandable if several obverse and reverse dies were mounted side by side and had all in theory to be aligned before striking took place (see Addenda). Mis-strikes Apart from the mis-alignment of dies (see above), die failure to centre blanks, the use, in the case of die bronze coinage, of a blank intended for a smaller denomination 1
The assertion of C. H. V. Sutherland, Cittophori, 13, cf. 18, that in the late Republic the mint was divided into officinae which each used a different reverse type seems to be based on an out of date chronology of the issues of the year 44. * Hot striking is implied by Lucan vi, 403; Statius, Silvae in, 3,102-5; note the early bronze struck from two blanks fused together and the denarius of L. Buca struck from three blanks fused together (p. 583 n. 2) and see L. H. Cope, NC 1969, 158-9, for hot striking of antoniniani of Claudius II. But the blank cannot have been very hot, or traces of overstruck coins would not have remained, nor would brockages (one coin striking another, see below) have been possible. Republican overstrikes belong mainly to the period of emergency coinage during the Second Punic War. For a denarius of C. Poblicius struck cold see J. Condamin, J. Guey, M. Picon, RN 1965,130 n. 1. 1 The terminology and the ratio of suppostores to malliatores are to be found in ILS 1635; the malliatores presumably took it in turns to wield the hammer, cf. the tessera in Vienna with a representation of coining, C. C. Vermeule, Ancient dies, Representation no. 11. * See, for instance, T. V. Buttrey, MusN i960, 96 - four out of five specimens from the same pair of dies show the dies in the same position. * RN 1967, pi. xiii, 42. * The as of L. Titurius Sabinus (no. 344/4) briefly and unclearly described by R. Kampmann, BSFN i960,400, seems also to display parts of the impressions of two obverse dies and two reverse dies. ' The Greek coins discussed by G. F. Hill, NC 1922,37-8, seem also to result from attempts to strike two or more coins simultaneously; they are not, as he thought, evidence for 'hubbing', on which see above.
582
Struck coins than that being produced 1 and the production of coins anything but circular (the blank was not confined by a collar as nowadays), various things could go wrong in the process of striking. The blank could move between hammer blows, acquiring thereby double images; more than one blank could be inserted, with the result that one-sided coins appeared.2 One-sided coins were presumably normally re-struck; traces of this process survive in coins which have a double image on one side only (a quadrigatus in the Montedoro hoard, for instance). There are occasional examples of coins which have been struck, turned over and restruck, presumably because the images produced by the first striking were inadequate;3 there was evidently at least some attempt at quality control. But the commonest mis-striking of the Republican coinage is the brockage, normally produced when a coin remained embedded in the punch (reverse) die and impressed the next blank with a concave version of the anvil (obverse) type. Most silver issues of the Republic are represented by brockages of this kind, certainly from the beginning of the denarius coinage (note a brockage of no. 72/3 in the Tivisa hoard, one of no. 72/1 in the Serra Orlando hoard); there is a brockage of the gold issue no. 490/2 in Vienna; Leningrad has a brockage of an early bronze issue, no. 63/6, 64/6 or 65/6 (incidentally also overstruck).4 Very occasionally a coin was left in the anvil (obverse) die and impressed the next blank with a concave version of the punch (reverse) type; so a denarius of Longinus (no. 413/1) in The Hague (1929/76) and one of L. Aemilius Buca (no. 480/6) in Paris (A 3932) and a quadrans of M. Acilius (no. 255/4) m Paris (A 3790). There are two examples known to me (Paris, A 13251 - a denarius of Cn. Nerius; Pontecorvo hoard 1205 - a denarius of C. Pansa) of a brockage of this second kind restruck, presumably to achieve acceptable quality. But the overall impression is of a coinage produced carelessly and in haste; the impression is supported both by the argument adduced above from the pattern of work in die mint and by the extent to which dies were used long after breaks had begun to mar the intelligibility of the design (see Pi. LVIII, 20 for instance). Given the scale on which the Republican coinage was produced (see pp. 6968".), we should not be surprised. 1
M. Bahrfeldt, Antike Miinztechnik, p. 7 of offprint. * G. F. Hill, NC 1922, 34 n. 76; E. Fabbricotti tells me there is a similar piece in a private collection in Rome. Moscow 28675 ' s a denarius of L. Aemilius Buca (no. 480/4) struck on three flans fused together; the Vicarello find includes a Minerva/Horse's head ROMANO bronze (no. 17/1) struck on two flans fused together to form afigure-of-eightshape. 3 A denarius of C. Vibius Pansa (no. 342/5) in the Rizzi hoard (Coin hoards, no. 268); a denarius of T. Carisius in the San Bartolomeo hoard (C. Cavedoni, Memorie di Religione, di Morale e di Letteratura iv, 1834, 29011.); a denarius of L. Titurius Sabinus (no. 344/1), Haeberlin 1371. 4 Cf. M. Bahrfeldt, Antike Mtinztechnik, p. 8 of offprint, nos. 2-6, for Imperial examples of bronze brockages. C. Cavedoni, Memorie di Religione iv, 1834, 29011., cites from the San Bartolomeo hoard a coin of Paullus Lepidus which appears to be not only a brockage, but hopelessly badly centred.
583
Technique and technology Control-marks1 On some issues (mainly silver, occasionally bronze, never gold) diere occur differential marks which appear to relate to a procedure for controlling the way in which dies were used.2 The fourth issue of didrachms (no. 22) provides the earliest instance; each reverse die is numbered, with Greek numerals ;3 each obverse die bears a symbol, but the same symbol occurs on several dies. A straightforward differentiation of dies is readily intelligible, but it is not immediately obvious what the purpose was of a symbol occurring on several dies. The dilemma is presented in an even more acute form by later issues. The different systems of control-marks may be classified as follows. Control-mark occurring on obverse or reverse only, different for each die C. Fonteius, no. 290 Ti. Q., no. 297 Mn. Fonteius, no. 307 M. Herennius, no. 308 L. Scipio Asiagenus, no. 311 L. Memmius Gal., no. 313 L. Saturninus, no. 317/2-3 C. Coilius Caldus, no. 318 C. Fabius, no. 322 C. Fundanius, no. 326 T. Cloulius, no. 332 L. Piso Frugi, no. 340/2 C. Vibius Pansa, no. 342/1 C. Censorinus, no. 346/2 L. C. Memies Gal., no. 349 Gargonius, Ogulnius, Vergilius, no. 350A/1 C. Licinius Macer, no. 35473b 1
2
3
C. Norbanus, no. 357 P. Crepusius, etc., no. 360 Q. Antonius Balbus, no. 364/ lb C. Valerius Flaccus, no. 365 C. Annius, no. 366 Ex s.c, no. 376 C. Naevius Balbus, no. 382/ib Ti. Claudius, no. 383 M. Volteius, no. 385/3 P. Satrienus, no. 388/lb L. Lucretius Trio, no. 390/2 C. Egnatius Maxsumus, no. 39i/ib-2 L. Farsuleius Mensor, no. 392 L. Cossutius Sabula, no. 395 Q. Pomponius Rufus, no. 398 M. Plaetorius Cestianus, no. 405/1-4 and no. 409/2
This section supersedes my remarks in PBSR 1966, 18. The marks on the issue of Cn. Blasio (no. 296/1) divide it into twelve varieties, and are not really control-marks. Likewise, the marks on the issue of C. Malleolus (no. 335/3) divide it into five varieties. For the odd use of letters on the issues of C. Limetanus and L. Cassius Longinus see on nos. 362 and 413. It makes no difference whether the differential marks are letters, numerals or symbols; the argument of A. Alfoldi, SM 1954, 18 and 25, that certain symbols show the technicians in the mint to have been devotees of Isis is simply fantastic; are other technicians to be regarded as strong believers in augural ritual? This part of the system is borrowed from the Ptolemaic coinage (see p. 39); note also the controlmarks on the Minerva/Eagle bronze (no. 23/1), borrowed from the contemporary coinage of the Mamertines (see p. 40).
584
Struck coins Unrelated control-marks occurring on obverse and reverse, different for each die N. Fabius Pictor, no. 268/ib L. Cota, no. 314/id Q. Antonius Balbus, no. 364/1 e So far we are faced simply with differentiation of dies, normally obverse or reverse, very occasionally both.1 But since there are numerous issues which bear no control-marks, the problem arises of why differentiation was undertaken so haphazardly. At this point, the issue of L. Manlius and L. Sulla (no. 367) becomes relevant. The control-marks on this issue, when they occur, take the form of numerals placed on the reverse before the horses' legs and this might seem straightforward enough. But VI, IX, XV and XX are the only numerals which occur (see commentary on no. 367), and on dies where there is plenty of room there is normally no trace of a numeral at all. Nor is this all. When one does occur, it is very small and very faint and clearly not cur into the dies in the same way as the rest of the type. It seems almost to have been scratched on as a sort of last-minute extra and of this I think there are only two possible explanations which make sense. Either the mark was normally placed elsewhere than on the face of the die or it was usually scratched on the die so lightly that it became obliterated almost as soon as striking began. Either way, I think we must conclude that at any rate this issue was provided with a system of control-marks, the traces of which were not intended to survive on the coins.2 We are now in a position to consider a different system of control-marks. Control-mark occurring on obverse or reverse only, the same for several dies C. Sulpicius, no. 312 L. Cota, no. 314/ib-c L. Thorius Balbus, no. 316 L. Saturninus, no. 317/1 L. Sentius, no. 325 Piso, Caepio, no. 330 D. Silanus, no. 337/1-2 Q. Titius, no. 34i/4d3 C. Vibius Pansa, no. 342/3-5 M. Cato, no. 343/2
L. Titurius Sabinus, no. 344/3 Gargonius, Ogulnius, Vergilius, no. 350A/3 Q. Antonius Balbus, no. 364/ic-d Anonymous quinarii, no. 373 L. Volumnius Strabo, no. 377 C. Naevius Balbus, no. 382/ia C. Egnatius Maxsumus, no. 391/3 L. Plaetorius, no. 396/ib M. Mettius, no. 480/3 and 17
It is possible that each of the very small number of control-marks on the first two issues of denarii of D. Silanus (no. 337/1-2) are artists' signatures; but this explana1 2 3
Where both are differentiated, the ratio of obverse to reverse dies may readily be ascertained, sec p. 672. See also below, on the issue of L. Iulius Bursio. Note also one as of C. Vibius Pansa (no. 342/7b) with a control-mark.
585
Technique and technology tion will clearly not work for the denarii of, for instance, C. Sulpicius (no. 312), where all the letters of the Latin alphabet occur as control-marks. Given the possibility that a die could be marked elsewhere than on the face, we are presented with two alternatives. Either the mint used for some issues one control-mark on the face of a die and another elsewhere or it was content for some issues to differentiate only groups of dies.1 Two systems of control-marks remain to be discussed. Some issues bear a controlmark on the obverse paired invariably with a particular control-mark on die reverse. Each pair of control-marks may have one pair of dies or more dian one obverse and reverse die. The issues involved are twelve in all. Paired control-marks, with one pair of dies L. Iulius Caesar, no. 320 Lentulus Marcelli f., no. 329 P. Sabinus, no. 331 C. Marius Capito, no. 378 L. Papius, no. 384 M. Volteius, no. 385/4 L. Roscius Fabatus, no. 412 Paired control-marks, widi more than one obverse and reverse die L. Cassius Caeicianus, no. 321 M. Serveilius, no. 327 C. Poblicius, no. 380 Q. Crepereius Rocus, no. 399 L. Axsius Naso, no. 400 Since obverse dies lasted longer than reverse dies (see p. 672), die pairing of one obverse die and one reverse die meant a waste of part of the working life of die obverse die. In die case of paired control-marks, with more dian one obverse and reverse die, an obverse die still functional could be used with a newly cut reverse die, always provided the pairing of control-marks was preserved. The pairing of controlmarks should presumably be regarded as a primitive attempt to control the use of obverse and reverse dies in relation to each other. It remains to discuss a small group of issues, some of which show traces of a more sophisticated attempt to control the use of obverse and reverse dies in relation to each odier C. Allius Bala, no. 336 D. Silanus, no. 337/3 L. Piso Frugi, no. 340/1 1
The obverse dies of the fourth issue of didrachms (no. 22, see above) must be remembered in this connection.
586
Struck coins C. Censorinus, no. 346/1 L. Iulius Bursio, no. 352 P. Crepusius, no. 361 C. Piso Frugi, no. 408 The control-marks on the third issue of denarii of D. Silanus (no. 337/3) are a letter of the Latin alphabet on the obverse and a numeral between I and XXX on the reverse. In principle, every letter is combined with every numerals an obverse die may be combined with reverse dies with different numerals and a reverse die may be combined widi obverse dies with different letters. The pattern is best explained, I dunk, by supposing that the mint was operating twenty-two anvils simultaneously, to each of which a letter was assigned;1 each anvil then worked through die numerals, taking over new obverse dies with its letter as required; a given obverse die with a letter could thus be used with two or diree reverse dies with different numerals; a given reverse die widi a numeral could move from one anvil to anodier by way of an overnight stay in a box of reverse dies. I have suggested above that the control-marks on die first two issues of denarii of D. Silanus are artists' signatures; but die gigantic third issue was part of die Roman response to die expected outbreak of die Social War and it is reasonable to suppose that a different system of control-marks could have been adopted (see p. 608 n. 1). But it was not entirely without precedent; the system on die issue of C. Allius Bala (no. 336) bears a certain formal similarity, which is, I dunk, significant. What happened here was that die issue was eventually much less extensive dian anticipated. Twenty-one anvils were each apparendy assigned a letter; but instead of dieir working dirough die symbols which formed die control-marks on die reverse, only one symbol, a grasshopper, was used by all anvils; the remaining symbols, a few dies to each, were distributed each to two or three anvils. The issue of denarii of L. Piso Frugi (no. 340/1) moves from a system of paired control-marks, widi one pair of dies in each case, to a system of paired groups of dies, widi the same type of control-mark widiin each group and widi a different actual control-mark for each die. Eventually, however, all system disappears and obverse dies and reverse dies, often repeating die same control-mark again and again, are combined according to no discernible principle. Such was die pressure of production in the first year of the Social War. The first issue of denarii of C. Censorinus (no. 346/1) copies die worst features of the system of L. Piso Frugi, but with decreasing enthusiasm;2 in die course of die issue control-marks begin to drop out and eventually disappear altogedier. The issue of C. Piso L.f. Frugi (no. 408) likewise copies die system of control-marks of L. Piso Frugi, without understanding or conviction (see commentary on no. 408). 1
The letters A to X with retrograde D.
• See p. 584 above for the second issue.
587
Technique and technology Only with the issues of L. Iulius Bursio (no. 352) and P. Crepusius (no. 361) do we find traces of really intelligent attempts to control the use of obverse and reverse dies in relation to each other. The whole issue of L. Iulius Bursio forms a single sequence, produced in one workshop. Apparently a number of symbols was chosen and cut into the obverse dies with which it was intended to start the issue; when a die wore out it was replaced by one with the same symbol. Meanwhile the reverse dies were simply running through a series of different types of control-marks; but the way in which the obverse dies were replaced suggests that the mint was thinking in terms of the relationship of obverse and reverse dies (for details see commentary on no. 352). The most carefully designed system of control-marks is that of P. Crepusius. The reverse control-mark is simply a numeral, but on the obverse the letters of the Latin alphabet were used in turn first with no symbol and then with each of twenty-three different symbols. This type of obverse control-mark is slightly different from that of L. Iulius Bursio, but follows naturally from it. Instead of the same symbol being used and replaced when necessary throughout the issue, all the dies with the same symbol were used in a group over only a small part of the total sequence. But several groups were always current at any one time. Widi a number of obverse dies being thus succeeded not just by any new obverse die, but by an individually designed replacement, a fairly careful check must have been kept on the correlation of obverse and reverse die use. At the end, only two general remarks can safely be made.1 First, I know of no example of a control-mark being re-cut to make another control-mark,2 except in the year 44 ;3 this suggests that in the heyday of control-marks (from 130 to 60) they always related to dies and never to anydiing else. Second, even if we are not prepared to assume that control-marks existed which did not form part of the type, it is apparent that there were a number of different approaches to the practice in the Roman mint; whedier the inventiveness involved was that of the moneyers or of humbler functionaries, we cannot say.4 For us, however, control-marks are not without their uses. They make a die-study of an issue considerably easier. They also provide some sort of check on estimates (based on how many dies survive) of how many dies were used for an issue; it is reasonably certain, for instance, that the control-marks on the obverse of the second 1
2 3
4
I know of no certain evidence which would suggest that control-marks on the Republican coinage were intended to serve as indications of date (though see commentary on no. 290); nor do they indicate what sources of metal were used. A control-letter was repaired in the issue of N. Fabius Pictor, corrected in that of L. Lucretius Trio. A. Alfoldi, SM 1964, 70; 1968, 60; I am not convinced by the supposed example of a re-cutting of the letter L into the letter B; it is in any case difficult to regard the letters on these two types of the year 44 as control-letters of the traditional type. It is interesting that C. Piso Frugi (no. 408) seems to ape the approach to control-marks of the issue of his father L. Piso Frugi (no. 340); C. Capito (no. 378) seems to misunderstand the system of control-marks of P. Crepusius (no. 361).
588
Struck coins issue of L. Lucretius Trio (no. 390/2) have only one die each; the sequence of numerals goes up to LXXX and an estimate of how many dies altogether were used which goes far beyond this figure cannot be right. 1 in
CAST COINS
(280-212 B.C.)J see p. 44
None of the moulds used for the production of the aes grave of the Roman Republic survives;2 they were presumably destroyed once they were no longer usable, as dies were. Several specimens produced in the same mould now survive (see E. J. Haeberlin, Aes grave, Pi. 25,1-3, for instance) and moulds were presumably used many times, though no estimate is possible of just how many times (see also p. 693). It is also apparent that the moulds for a number of pieces were interconnected and could be poured simultaneously; the Museo Civico di Bologna possesses a piece of aes grave still attached to the 'tree' of bronze which once connected it to at least four other pieces poured with it.3 1
2 For further details see p. 640. Th. Mommsen, RMzu, 186 n. 59. ' Bologna, Cat. 15 with PI. 4; E. J. Haeberlin, Aes grave, PI. 52, 39. Earlier asses were apparently poured in moulds which disposed them one above another, E. J. Haeberlin, Aes grave, 37-8. The group of still interconnected asses in the British Museum, Th. Mommsen, RMtu, 186 n. 59, is not a modern forgery, as M. Bahrfeldt, Antike Miinztechnik, p. 4 of offprint; but it is a group of struck pieces, not of cast pieces, see p. 753.
589
2 WEIGHT STANDARDS Since the theoretical and actual weight standards of an issue of coinage may differ, our understanding of the financial history of the Roman Republic will clearly be affected not only by variations in theoretical weight standards, but also by the extent to which theoretical weight standards were observed. Some basic problems have to be faced. Although we possess a certain amount of literary information about Republican weight standards, the identification of the issues struck according to these theoretical standards depends on the discovery of the actual weight standards of the issues (one may even have to guess on the basis of these what the theoretical standards are). There are in addition notorious practical difficulties in the way of establishing actual weight standards and in the way of expressing the theoretical weight standards of Rome in modern terms. I
THE ROMAN POUND
The weight standard of the earliest Roman silver coinage, the didrachm coinage, was borrowed from die silver coinage of Campania.1 But the standard of the Roman didrachm coinage was rapidly adjusted downwards to a level which stands in a simple 3:2 relationship with the level at which the standard of the denarius began its existence. This standard of the denarius in turn stands in a series of simple relationships with the various standards of the mainstream bronze coinage of the Roman Republic. These in turn can all be expressed in terms of the Roman pound, which may be regarded as being by the time of the early Republic a distinctively Roman unit of weight. Valuations in pounds of bronze constituted for the Romans the first step towards coinage, taken in die course of the fourth century,2 and die unit on which die earliest issue of bronze coinage was based weighed just a pound. This unit was called the as. The ultimate origin of die Roman pound and the derivation of die word 'as' are both obscure.3 But die existence of the words 'dupondius' or 'doubleweight' and 'assipondium' or 'singleweight'4 should imply that as far as die coinage is concerned 'as' simply means 'unit'. 5 The term was perhaps taken over together with 1
R. Thomsen, ERC iii, 138-9. • Livy iv, 30, 3 with commentary of R. M. Ogilvie. 3 B. Laum, Heiliges Geld, 117-18, on 'as', should not be taken seriously. 4 Varro, LL v, 169; Festus, s.v. Dispensatores. 4 For 'as' as a unit in a non-monetary context see TLL ii, 746-7; Varro, LL v, 169 is clearly wrong to derive 'as' from ' aes'.
590
The Roman pound its subdivisions into 12 ounces and 288 scruples from the terminology of length or area measurement.1 Certainly it is interesting that a pound of bronze is approximately a handful and it seems plausible that this should have been designated as a 'unit' or 'as' and then have been assigned the subdivisions already associated with the 'as*. This view is perhaps supported by the fact that a number of Italian communities produced bronze coinages the standards of which approximated more or less closely to the Roman pound;2 opinions perhaps differed as to what constituted a handful. Calculations of the weight of the Roman pound, assuming this to have been constant throughout Roman history, may be based either on objects weighing a pound or on objects weighing a known fraction or multiple of a pound. 3 A list of some of the various calculations that have been made is instructive.4 327.45 grammes 327.18 325.80 325.06 or 325.40 323.50 32347 323.26 322.56
Coins Coins Stone weight Stone weights Weights Balances Stone weights Coins and weights
A. Boeckh5 J. A. Letronne6 L. Cagnazzi7 E. Hiibner8 A. Segre9 M. Lazzarini10 M. Lazzarini11 L. Naville12
There are no decisive criteria for regarding any of these calculations as correct, although some clearly have greater plausibility than others; nor does it in fact seem reasonable to suppose that the Romans were able to maintain the weight of thenpound absolutely constant, at all times and in all places.13 Of the various calculations I
Varro, RR i, 10, 2; Columella v, 1, 12; Pliny, NH xviii, 178; cf. J. Rubino, Vorgeschichte, 9 n. 9. • Tuder, Tarquinii, Reate and the Vestini, as well as a number of Latin colonies. In any case, I regard all attempts to derive the Roman pound from Eastern weight systems as misconceived; cf. J. Beloch, GG i, 2, 333-5, on the theories of F. Hultsch. 3 Cf. P. Grierson, JVC 1963, The President's Address, vii-viii. 4 The list owes much to the list drawn up by Grierson, xi-xiv. The calculations of O. Viedebannt, Forschungen, 82; E. J. Haeberlin, Frankfurter Munzzeitung 1918, 391 are based on weighings of Republican denarii and are insufficiently precise to be worth reproducing. The existence of a pound of 206.25 8r-> advocated by O. Viedebannt, Forschungen, 73 and 79, is sufficiently disproved by E. J. Haeberlin, NZ 1919, 85. s Metrologische Untersuchungen, 165. • Considirations, 3-8. 7 Sui valori delle misure, 115-17, cf. 95. • MonatsberichteKPAW 1861, 544-5; CIL ii, 4962. 10 • Metrologia, 137. RAL 1948, 221. II NSc 1907, 689, citing earlier calculations; BCAR 1908, 69, citing earlier calculations; Conimbriga 1965, 8 i . 11 L. Naville, SNR 1920-22, 42 and 257; Les monnaies d'or de la Cyrinalque, 108. The comment of W. Giesecke, Berliner Munzbldtter 1922, 375 and 401 adds nothing; his pound of 279.36 gr., Italia Numismatica, 217-18, is based on the curious belief that an Attic talent weighed the same as 6,000 denarii. The citation of O. Viedebannt, RE iiA, 1348, is merely careless. 19 For official weights and measures kept on the Capitol see ILS 8629-35; Carmen de ponderibus 62; Hyginus 123; H. Willers, Kupferpragung, 203; A. Eran, SM 1969, 8, with earlier bibliography; note also the Lex Silia de ponderibus.
591
Weight standards that have been made, a large number are in the vicinity of 324 gr.; this seems to me the most sensible equivalence to adopt; although it is of course not exactly right, it is certainly not far wrong and has the great merit of being easily divisible by the numbers by which the Romans were in the habit of dividing; greater precision in adopting an equivalence is entirely spurious (see Addenda). We may thus draw up the following table of equivalences: 1 pound
= 324 gr.
1 uncia
= Tl5 pound = 27 gr.
1 scruple (scripulum) = ^ i i pound = 1.125 grII
ASCERTAINING WEIGHT STANDARDS
If then one accepts a Roman pound of c. 324 grammes, it is possible to go on to investigate the actual weight standards of the various issues of the Republican coinage, the theoretical standards in each case and the extent to which the two coincided. An issue of coinage was described by the Romans as struck so many to the pound1 and this terminology presumably reflected mint-practice; certainly no attempt was made to adjust the weight of individual pieces very carefully.2 Blanks were presumably made roughly the same size in the hope that they would turn out roughly the same weight and the size reduced or increased towards the end of a batch depending on how the metal was lasting;3 thus the mean weight of a batch of coinage straight from the mint would be the same as its weight standard. But this is clearly not true of the coinage which survives today, almost all of which is more or less worn or corroded; hence the difficulty of establishing the actual weight standard of an issue of Roman coinage. It has been argued that a frequency table may be a more reliable guide to the weight standard of an issue than an arithmetical averaging process.4 But there is no reason why this should be so and there are cases where a frequency table can be seen to be totally unreliable as an indication of weight standard (see below). The best way, therefore, to discover the weight standard of an issue is to take the mean of the weights of unworn specimens;5 if this is impossible the only 1
See p. 594 n. l and p. 593 n. 5 below; also CTh xii, 6, 13; xv, 9, 1; CJ x, 72, 5. Cf. Th. Mommsen, RMvi, 296 n. 25; T. Hackens, RBN 1962, 42-3, suggests, perhaps rightly, that technique improved towards the end of the Republic. For obvious reasons, greater care was always taken over the preparation of blanks for aurei. As examples of variations in weights of denarii, note well-preserved denarii with gryphon (no. 182/1) weighing 5.01 gr. (thus Paris, A 2310) and 3.27 gr. (thus Hannover 1445). ' The data discussed by T. Hackens, RBN 1962, 39-41, may point to the division of the issue of Petillius Capitolinus into successive batches, each including specimens of the four types composing the issue. 4 G. F. Hill, NC 1923, 364; NC 1924, 76; L. C. West, Coin standards, 4; T. Hackens, RBN 1962, 32. 6 See P. Grierson, JVC 1963, The President's Address, iii-iv, for the principle underlying this conclusion.
s
592
Ascertaining weight standards
valid alternative is to take the mean of the weights of available specimens and attempt to estimate the mean loss of weight as a result of wear and corrosion.1 Although in neither case is it possible to achieve absolute precision, there are enough groups of coins in unworn condition to allow useful deductions to be made about possible mean loss of weight. Taken as a whole the evidence allows reasonable certainty about both actual and theoretical weight standards. Ill
GOLD2
The properties of this metal are such that wear does not cause much weight-loss;3 it is probably also true that gold circulates less than other metals. One may therefore expect the mean weight of surviving specimens of a gold issue to be close to the original mean weight. This expectation is confirmed by a hoard consisting solely of aurei of A. Hirtius (no. 466) and presumably buried in an almost uncirculated condition soon after the date of issue. The mean weight of the hoard pieces is only marginally higher than that of other surviving pieces, 8.035 gr. as opposed to 8.03 gr.4 The mean weights of the two denominations of Rome's earliest gold issue (nos. 28/1-2 and 29/1-2) are given by Bahrfeldt as 6.82 gr. and 3.41 gr., slightly above the weights of 6 scruples (6.75 gr.) and 3 scruples (3.375 gr.) respectively. The weight standard of the Roman stater may therefore be regarded for convenience as 6 scruples, that of the half-stater as 3 scruples. The weight standard of the three denominations of Rome's second gold issue (nos. 44/2-4, 50/1, 72/2, 88/1,105/2,106/2) may similarly be regarded as based on a 60-as piece of 3 scruples, with the exception of no. 72/2, which is perhaps slightly underweight. The weight standards of both gold issues are described in the Catalogue according to the principles outlined in this paragraph. The gold coinage of the Empire from Augustus to Nero was based on an aureus struck at 40 to the pound,5 thus weighing 7-J- scruples = 8.10 gr. From no. 456 onwards the mean weights of aurei given by Bahrfeldt approximate very closely to this weight and the aurei in question, together with their occasional half-pieces, may be regarded as based on a weight-standard for the aureus of i\ scruples. Earlier gold issues of the first century B.C. cannot be so neatly described, but there is a pattern of progressive decline in weight from the Sullan issues onwards; the introduction of, in effect, a new monetary metal presumably involved experiments and adjustments, but the reasoning behind them cannot now be recovered.6 1
This will obviously vary, depending on the extent to which an issue circulated and on the metallic composition and size of the coins. A possible further complication, for which it is impossible to allow, is that some of the heavier specimens of an issue may have been picked out and melted down. 2 I do not discuss the weight standard of the gold issue struck for T. Quinctius Flamininus (no. 548), which is Greek, that of a Macedonian stater. 3 P. Grierson, NC 1963, The President's Address, xiv n. 1. 4 s M. Bahrfeldt, Goldmunzenpragung, p. 36. Pliny, NH xxxiii, 47. • The weight standard of the aureus of Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius (no. 460/1), known only from one specimen, cannot really be established. The weight standard of the gold piece of Cn. Lentulus (no. 549) is mysterious to me; I suspect it to be non-Roman (see commentary).
593
Weight standards IV
SILVER
The denarius of the late Republic was in theory struck at 84 to the pound,1 thus weighing 3$ scruples = 3.86 gr.2 Detailed examination of the issues of M. Volteius shows that it adhered to this standard. For the first variety (no. 385/1) T. Hackens cites a mean for 176 specimens of 3.77 gr.,3 while the peak of a frequency table falls at 3.90 gr.; although the latter weight is probably close to the weight standard of the variety, this is entirely fortuitous. Better evidence is provided by the 55 specimens of the whole issue in fresh condition in die Maccarese hoard,4 buried about 5 years after the date of the issue. The mean weight of the first variety is 3.89, of the second variety 3.88, of the diird variety 3.80, of the fourth variety 3.82.5 The mean of all four varieties together is 3.84. When a frequency table is constructed, the first variety produces a peak at 4.00, the fourth variety a peak at 3.80 (the second and third varieties are not represented by enough specimens to construct a frequency table); all four varieties together show peaks at 4.00 and at 3.80.6 It seems reasonable to suppose that the first two varieties were struck on a slightly higher standard than the second two; but diere is no way of deciding whether the former were struck first and the weight standard was then adjusted downwards or vice versa. The weight standard of the whole issue should be regarded as being slightly more than 3.84 gr. and equated with the theoretical weight standard of die denarius, 3.86 gr. If then die issue of M. Volteius was struck on a weight standard of 3$ scruples = 3.86 gr., it is reasonable to expect that this was also true of all other issues of the denarius coinage after its early period (from no. 197 onwards). Detailed examination 1
Pliny, NH xii, 62 (assuming that 1 mina = 1 libra); xxxiii, 132; Celsus, de medicina v, 17, 1; Scribonius Largus, ad Callistum, praef.; Celsus, ad Pull. Nat. in F. Hultsch, MSR ii, 284, no. 3. * The corresponding weights for victoriatus, quinarius and sestertius are 2* scruples, if scruples and I scruples. 8 RBN 1962, 32. * Coin hoards, no. 309. ' The fifth variety is not represented in the hoard. ' Frequency table of no. 385/1: Frequency table of no. 385/4: 4.10 gr. + ++ + 4.00 gr. ++++ ++++++ 3.90 gr. + +++ ++ + 3.80 gr. + ++++++++++ + 3.70 gr. + ++++ ++ + 3.60 gr. + ++ + 3.50 gr. + Frequency table of no. 385/1-^4: 4.10 gr. ++++ + 4.00 gr. ++ + + + + + + 3.90 gr. ++++++++++++++ 3.80 gr. 3.70 gr. + ++++++++ + 3.60 gr. +++ + 3.50 gr. + 3.40 gr. +
594
Silver of every issue would be laborious and in many cases, in the absence of hoards with large numbers of fresh pieces, impossible; but it is possible to observe without much difficulty that the pattern of weights of pieces of most of these issues in museums is similar to the pattern of weights of pieces of the issue of M. Volteius.1 The only issue in the late Republic which one may assert was not struck on a weight standard of 3^ scruples is diat of Scarpus (no. 546).* The legionary issue of M. Antonius (no. 544), although debased (see p. 569), was of full weight. It remains to consider the early period of the denarius coinage.3 Here it is apparent that at first the denarius was in theory struck at 72 to the pound, thus weighing four scruples.4 Of the issues from no. 44 to no. 111, all but a few observed this theoretical standard;5 nos. 57-8 and most of nos. 112-21 occupy an intermediate position between the issues struck with a denarius of 1/72 pound and the issues struck with a denarius of 1/84 pound, as do nos. 125-6 and 128, which are detached from the main sequence. The relatively high standards of nos. 153-5 and 157 are doubdess fortuitous. V BRONZE
As already remarked, the weight of the as of the earliest substantive issue (no. 14) of bronze coinage of the Roman Republic was just a pound; 6 with the second and third issues (nos. 18-19) the weight of die as rose somewhat, for reasons at which it is only possible to guess;7 it then dropped below a pound and settled at about ten ounces (nos. 21 onwards).8 1
Note the issues of quinarii of C. Fundanius, T. Cloulius, P. Sabinus and C. Egnatuleius discussed by H. Willers, Kupferpragung, 48 ; the mean weights of the (very large) numbers of specimens of each issue in the Sustinenza hoaid (Coin hoards, no. 339) are 1.91 gr., 1.90 gr., 1.885 8r- a n d 1-995 Br-> corresponding to denarii of 3.82 gr., 3.80 gr., 3.77 gr. and 3.99 gr. * There are a few issues of around 200 and again in the 170s which are not of full weight, nos. 115-16, 127 and 129-31; 162-9. 1 First properly discussed by K. Samwer and M. Bahrfeldt, ' Geschichte des alteren romischen Mllnzwesens', NZ 1883, 90-2. 4 The corresponding weights for victoriatus, quinarius and sestertius are 3 scruples, 2 scruples and 1 scruple. Note Galen, de pond. 7 and 13. 6 See NC 1970, 52-3 for documentation of the weight standards of the three victoriatus issues nos. 70/1,71/1 and 83/1; the mean weights of unworn specimens are high enough for the issues in question to be regarded as having been struck on a full three-scruple standard. Silver issues in this period not struck according to the theoretical standard are nos. 102/1 and 103/1-2.
* The weight standards of the various issues of aes grave have been calculated on the basis of the lists of weights in E. J. Haeberlin, Aes grave, except in the case of no. 19, for which the weights of the specimens in the Ardea and Santa Marinella hoards {Coin hoards, nos. 20-1) have been used, as well as those of the specimens listed by Haeberlin, and of no. 40, for which the weights of the specimens in Syracuse have also been used. 7 I suspect the increase in weight standard to be the accidental consequence of the very high relief of the types; the light-weight quadrantes, sextantes and unciae of the Apollo/Apollo series (no. 18) perhaps represent an attempt at compensation. Another odd, unexplained phenomenon is the existence of heavy-weight semunciae of the Dioscuri/Mercury and Roma/Roma series of aes grave (nos. 14 and 21). * See E. j . Haeberlin, Aes grave, 36, for a frequency table of the weights of the Prow series with prow r. (no. 35).
595
Weight standards With the outbreak of the Second Punic War, financial stress brought about a series of drastic reductions in the weight standard of the bronze coinage (see p. 43): c. 217 c. 215-212 c. 214 c. 211
Semilibral standard1 Post-semilibral standards with attempted stabilisation Quadrantal standard Sextantal standard
Asses of six ounces at: Asses of three ounces Asses of two ounces
Associated with the sextantal standard was the new denarius coinage; with it financial stability returned. At the same time the Roman state took the first steps towards succeeding in making the bronze coinage at least to a certain extent a token coinage; some issues were struck seriously under-weight,2 other issues consisted of full-weight asses with under-weight as well as full-weight fractions;3 and from no. 57 onwards the weight standard of the bronze coinage as a whole gently declined. An attempt to raise it in c. 170 (see pp. 52-3) was unable to reverse the long-term trend and by the time the issue of C. Antestius (no. 219, the last for many years to include the as) was struck, the weight standard of the bronze coinage was based on an as of less than an ounce. The weights of the fractions struck in the following period produce (except for nos. 238-9) as-averages in the general region of 16 gr.; the weight standard was presumably in theory based on an as of two-thirds of an ounce, 18 gr. Only in 116 or 115 was it possible to make a fairly successful attempt to raise the weight standard of the bronze coinage; standards based on asses of one ounce and half-an-ounce existed side by side for a time,4 but eventually the former prevailed. In 91, in the face of the threat from the Social War, the weight standard of the bronze coinage was fixed at half-an-ounce (see pp. 77-8); the measure was doubtless precautionary, since it is hard to believe that the relatively restricted issues of the next few years exhausted Roman supplies of bronze; the one Sullan issue of bronze (no. 368) did not adopt the new standard.3 With the Sullan issue, the striking of bronze by the Roman Republic came to an 1
The Prow series with prow 1. (no. 36), based on an as of about 236 gr., forms a step in the direction of this standard; for discussion of the following standards see R. Thomsen, ERC ii, 39-48; pp. 625-8 below (the identification of standards by Lachaussce, RN 1911, 188, 313 and 407, is carried out in a wholly arbitrary fashion). 1 Nos. 63/2-6, 64/2-6, 65/2-6, 69/1-2, 97/22-8, 99/1-10, 100/1-7. ' Nos. 59-61 and 110. 4 In the issues of C. Fonteius (no. 290/5) and P. Nerva (no. 292/4); for these issues see M. Bahrfeldt, Nachtrdge iii, 49 and 139; the other issues regarded by Bahrfeldt as struck on a double standard are not in fact so struck - the really light-weight pieces of Me(tellus), Tamp(ilus), C. Scribonius and L. Pomponius are unofficial copies of Roman issues (see pp. 565-6), while the triens of C. Scribonius discussed by Bahrfeldt does not constitute a separate issue and the bronze coins of P. Maenius Antiaticus simply cover a very wide range of weights. 5 As may be seen from a number of Augustan hoards (Coin hoards, nos. 494, 514, 516, 517) and from the Bolsena hoard (MEFR 1964, 51), the Republican bronze which remained in circulation was of more or less uncial standard.
596
Bronze end for over diirty years; of the bronze coinage of the period of the civil wars it is impossible to form a clear picture. The asses of Cn. and Sex. Pompeius (nos. 471 and 478-9) were apparently intended to weigh about an ounce, the as of L. Atratinus (no. 530) and the dupondius of Cn. Piso Frugi (no. 547) were apparendy based on a semuncial standard.1 There is no way of telling what denominations were represented by the bronze issue of Octavian (no. 535)2 and the orichalcum issues of C. Clovius (no. 476) and Q. Oppius (no. 550),3 hence no way of identifying the standards involved. System and sanity returned only with the principate of Augustus. 1 2 3
For all these issues see M. Bahrfeldt, NZ 1909, 67-78 and 84-5. See H. Willers, Kupjerprdgung, nos. 103-4. For these two issues see M. Bahrfeldt, NZ 1909, 78-84. For the date of the issue of Q. Oppius see commentary. I do not regard the 'Fleet' bronze of M. Antonius as a mainstream Roman issue.
597
3 MONETARY MAGISTRATES I
MONEYERS
The creation of the office is mentioned in only one literary source (D i, 2, 2, 27-32 Pomponius), which must be quoted in full. Cumque consules avocarentur bellis finitimis neque esset qui in civitate ius reddere posset, factum est, ut praetor quoque crearetur, qui urbanus appellatus est, quod in urbe ius redderet. (28) Post aliquot deinde annos non sufficiente eo praetore, quod multa turba etiam peregrinorum in civitatem veniret, creatus est et alius praetor, qui peregrinus appellatus est ab eo, quod plerumque inter peregrinos ius dicebat. (29) Deinde cum esset necessarius magistratus qui hastae praeessent, decemviri in litibus iudicandis sunt constituti. (30) Constituti sunt eodem tempore et quattuorviri qui curam viarum agerent, et triumviri monetales aeris argenti auri flatores, et triumviri capitales qui carceris custodiam haberent, ut cum animadverti oporteret interventu eorum fieret. (31) Et quia magistratibus vespertinis temporibus in publicum esse inconveniens erat, quinqueviri constituti sunt cis Tiberim et ultis Tiberim, qui possint pro magistratibus fungi. (32) Capta deinde Sardinia, mox Sicilia, item Hispania, deinde Narbonensi provincia totidem praetores, quot provinciae in dicionem venerant, creati s u n t . . . And when the Consuls were taken away from Rome by wars with neighbouring peoples and there was no one available in the city to administer justice, it was arranged that there should also be a Praetor (who came to be called Praetor Urbanus), whose job it was to administer justice in the city. After some years he was unable to cope, as a result of the influx of foreigners, and another Praetor was created (who came to be called Praetor Peregrinus, since he administered justice for the most part among foreigners). Then when there was a need for magistrates to conduct auctions, Decemviri Litibus Iudicandis were instituted. At the same time Quattuorviri to look after the roads, Triumviri to strike coinage and Triumviri Capitales to look after the prison were also instituted, the last also charged with executions. And since it was inconvenient for magistrates to appear in public at night, Quinqueviri were appointed to act for them. Then with the capture of Sardinia, Sicily, Spain, Narbonensis, as many Praetors were created as there were provinces... The college of moneyers here forms part of a group of minor executive officers. Its existence (and litde more) is confirmed by two passages of Cicero, minores 598
Moneyers magistrates partiti iuris plures in plura sunto... aes argentum aurumve publice signanto . . . quodcumque senatus creverit, agunto (de leg. iii, 6) and Treviros vites censeo; audi capitales esse; mallem auro aere argento essent (Jam. vii, 13, 2, playing on the similarity between Treviri and tresviri). The number of moneyers was increased by Caesar from three to four, for political rather than administrative reasons (see Suetonius, Caes. 41, minorum etiam magistratuum numerum ampliavit, with the occurrence of the title IIIIVIR on issues of 44-40, nos. 480, 485, 494 and 525). The survival of the moneyers into the Empire (three in number once again) is attested by Dio liv, 26, 6. So far the literary sources on the moneyership (for mentions of a moneyer and a supposed moneyer see no. 347 and p. 547). A large body of Imperial inscriptions1 confirms the survival of the office. The full title of a moneyer under the Empire seems to have been triumvir (or tresvir) aere argento auroflandoferiundo (for instance in CIL iii, 6076).12 The abbreviation IIIVIR.A.A.A.F.F is normal on coins of the Augustan moneyers and on inscriptions of the Empire. It occurs also on the elogium of C. Claudius Ap.f. C.n. Pulcher, Cos. 92 (Inscr. It. xiii, 3, no. 70). Its two component halves occur on certain Republican coins, IIIVIR fairly frequendy, A.A.A.F.F on no. 480, and I see no reason to doubt that the normal title of a moneyer under the Republic was the same as it was under the Empire. The legend IIIIVIR A(VRO) P(VBLICO) F(ERIVNDO) on coins of 42 of P. Clodius, L. Livineius Regulus and L. Mussidius Longus (no. 494) surely adverts to the fact that they belonged to the first college in the history of the Republic to strike gold (see pp. 94-5) and tells us nothing about the normal tide of a moneyer. The history and nature of die moneyership are both somewhat uncertain and the evidence of the coins must be considered in some detail (the constitutional position of the moneyership vis-d-vis Senate and people is discussed in Chapter 5). Most of die issues of the denarius coinage and almost all of its later issues bear a name (for the reasons behind the practice see below, pp. 601-2), sometimes accompanied by the abbreviated designation of a Republican or quasi-Republican magistracy, from IIIVIR and IIIIVIR to Q and IMPERAT(OR). In diese last cases the immediate source of audaority for the striking of the coins is apparent (for magistrates other dian moneyers see below). The names not accompanied by the designation of a magistracy are usually taken to be those of moneyers. This seems to me basically right. For the first century or so of die denarius coinage it simply never occurred to a moneyer (or 1
For which see Th. Mommsen, RMto, 366 n. 2; O. Hirschfeld, Verwaltungsbeamten, 183-4; H. Strasburger, RE viiA, 515; K. Pink, Triumviri Monetales, 8; J. R. Jones, BICS 1970, 70 (incomplete - add at least Corinth viii, 3, 125; AE 1968, 474; CIL vi, 1518 with RE Sextius 4 1 ; T. P. Wiseman, New men, no. 516). ' This order of aes, argentum, aurum is given by Pomponius and by Cicero also and is surely correct. Flare seems originally to have referred to cast coins (Varro, RR ii, 1, 9, aes antiquissimum quod est flatum pecore est notalum; Gellius ii, 10, 3), but already by the late Republic could refer simply to coins (Cicero, Sest. 66 and the legends on nos. 393/ib and 485/2); note also nummum conflatum in the fragment of Varro's Annales dealing with the coinage of Servius Tullius.
599
Monetary magistrates to anyone else) to indicate his magistracy on his coins, thereafter the presence or absence of the designation IIIVIR, IIIIVIR or A.A.A.F.F depend on the whim of the moneyer and are without significance. This appears most readily from die coinage of 44-40. After Caesar's increase in the number of moneyers, die designation IIIIVIR appears on die coins. But of die four moneyers of 44 L. Aemilius Buca alone uses it, on part of his issue, while C. Cossutius Maridianus uses the designation A.A.A.F.F, again on part of his issue. Of die diree moneyers who actually struck in 43, only L. Flaminius Chilo placed IIIIVIR on his coins. In 42 P. Clodius and L. Livineius Regulus placed IIIIVIR. A. P. F on die gold they struck for Antonius, Lepidus and Octavian, L. Mussidius Longus on part of the gold he struck for the Triumvirs, while C. Vibius Varus did not use the designation at all. And in 40 or 39 Ti. Sempronius Gracchus used IIIIVIR on one part of his issue. The absence of die designation IIIVIR from most issues of before 44 does not therefore preclude their having been produced by moneyers. And indeed some issues bear diree names, which it would be perverse not to regard as diose of a college of moneyers (nos. 283,284, 285, 335, 350A, 360 and probably 299). Groups of three issues each bearing one name can also sometimes be plausibly suggested (for instance nos. 214-16 and 255-7). But life would be too simple if all issues bearing just a name and no indication of a magistracy could be regarded as having been produced by moneyers and we must consider two special groups for which diis rule does not apply. The Republican coinage of die time of die Second Punic War, both before and after die introduction of the denarius, was struck at a number of mints in Italy and the adjacent islands (see p. 12). Of die symbols and letters used to distinguish the various issues most are ambiguous and to attempt to identify them is profidess. But some certainly indicate mints, a corn-ear for Sicily, I for Luceria (bodi used before and after die introduction of the denarius), £ for Corcyra, a corn-ear and ^ for Catana, some certainly indicate people, C- \fiL and C- AL- on issues struck in Sicily, C, AA and A# on issues struck in Sardinia, CN- C O on an issue of an uncertain mint. It seems to me diat die majority of ambiguous symbols and letters indicate people, although diis cannot be proved (see p. 725); but it is in any case clear that men who were not moneyers could sign an issue and diereby declare dieir immediate responsibility for it - C, AA and NZ represent die names of L. Cornelius (Lentulus), P. Manlius Vulso and C. Aurunculeius, Praetors of Sardinia in 211-209. Similarly, the gold issue widi die simple legend T- QVI NCTI (no. 548) was struck for T. Quinctius Flamininus, Cos. 198, in Greece (compare die issue of Cn. Lentulus (no. 549)). The second group of coins not bearing an indication of a magistracy, but not struck by moneyers, is die Narbo issue (no. 282). This consists of five varieties, each 600
Moneyers signed by a different man and all signed by L. Licinius Crassus and Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, Triumviri col. ded. 118. The coins were struck at Narbo and, although there is no explicit testimony, the law setting up the colony presumably made generous financial provision for this, the first Roman colony outside Italy, and Crassus, for whom the planting of the colony was the fulfilment of an ambition, evidently made arrangements to strike the coins himself. The exact position held by his five junior partners is uncertain. The great diversity of mints during the Second Punic War was doubdess caused by the breakdown in Roman communications in Italy after the batde of Cannae in 216. With Rome's recovery of control, in which the battle of the Metaurus in 207 was the last phase, the mints closed and between the end of the war and Sulla the only issues struck outside Rome were that of Flamininus and that produced at Narbo. The remainder of the coinage can be satisfactorily arranged in a single sequence and, in the absence of indications to the contrary, it should be regarded as having been produced by moneyers at the mint of Rome.1 By the time of Sulla a marked change in mint practice had taken place. Down to 118 no designation of any magistracy had appeared on the Republican coinage (the letter Q on nos. 86A and 86B probably indicates a person or a place). But soon after, M. Sergius Silus struck an issue of denarii which bore his name followed by the letter Q, which in this position can be understood only as the abbreviation for Quaestor. The issue belongs to die sequence of issues of the mint of Rome and the reason for the change in practice is surely die need to indicate the fact that someone odier than a moneyer is striking, for the first time, at the mint of Rome. Up to diis point only moneyers had struck there and their bare names had sufficed to identify the issue. Once die new practice of naming a magistracy other dian the moneyership had been adopted it was presumably adhered to; it was certainly taken over for almost all issues struck outside Rome.2 In any case, issues of the mint of Rome bearing only a name should in my view be regarded throughout the Republican coinage as having been struck by moneyers.3 If this view is right and if therefore the presence of moneyers' marks and names on the coinage indicates dieir existence from a point shortly after die institution of die denarius system onwards, say from 207 onwards, it is a largely academic question whether the magistracy came into being then or whether an existing magistracy 1
2 3
A slight puzzle is posed by the occurrence, within the sequence of issues from the mint of Rome, of anonymous issues side by side with signed issues; although for convenience they are numbered separately in the catalogue, I suspect that they belong in each case with particular signed issues (cf. pp. 48-50). The exceptions are nos. 373, 443, 452, 458, 468, 483, 500, 535 and 543. A. Alfoldi, Gnomon 1954, 389-91, argues that non-moneyers could strike at the mint of Rome without explicitly identifying themselves and that they are revealed to us by their choice of coin types; but the types in question can be otherwise explained and the suggestion introduces quite unnecessary confusion into the Republican coinage. For the interpretation by H. B. Mattingly of the formula ex.s.c. as the mark of an issue by a Quaestor (NC 1956, 189), see p. 88. 601
Monetary magistrates altered its previous practice. For it seems obvious that the practice of signing the coinage, adopted first for military issues outside Rome, then taken over by moneyers at Rome, was a response to the disastrous decline in the quality of the coinage which had characterised the last years of the didrachm system; a faulty batch, if signed, could be traced back to the man administratively responsible;1 and it was perhaps held that the Censors, with whom responsibility for die coinage during the existence of the didrachm system was probably vested (see pp. 42-3), had been guilty at least of incompetence in allowing the coinage to go to pieces. Although certainty is unattainable, I incline to die view that die moneyership was created widi or soon after die institution of the denarius system ;2 certainly die evidence of Pomponius (quoted above) is wordiless;3 but die question is unimportant.4 The moneyership was, I diink, diroughout an annual,6 elective magistracy. Mommsen originally argued that it was a special magistracy for a long time, used only when required.6 But dirough most of die second century, diere were moneyers, usually diree moneyers, functioning nearly every year. It was surely simpler to be prepared not to make use of every moneyer (see pp. 618-19) dian to have to arrange for a special magistracy as an almost annual event.7 Since ultimate responsibility for the coinage lay widi die people, it is reasonable to suppose diat die moneyers were elected radier dian appointed.8 The absence of the moneyers from die lists of magistrates in die epigraphic lex repetundarum, the lex Latina Tabulae Bantinae and Cicero, Cluent. 148 proves only diat moneyers were not by virtue of their office qualified for admission to the Senate and diereby automatically disqualified to serve as Gracchani iudices.9 As a matter of practice, of 1 9
For a concern withfinancialcontrol in this period see Livy xxv, 7, 5 for a special commission sacris conquirendis, donisque persignandis (in 212).
The IHviri mensarii appointed in 216 are of some relevance in this connection; the moneyers appointed from 211 are in a certain sense their successors (see p. 33). 3 So rightly Th. Mommsen, RMw, 367 n. 5; H. Schaefer, RE viiiA, 2574-5. 4 There is no evidence that the office was suppressed by the Triumvirs and revived by Augustus, contra H. A. Grueber, BMCRR i, lxviii; it simply did not function. 6 Tenure of office presumably began, as for the Quaestors, on 5 December. • RMw, 366-7; St. ii, 639, cf. 601. 7 If the moneyership was an annual magistracy, certain consequences for the arrangement of the coinage follow automatically; since nothing that we know of the Republican constitution suggests that a moneyer could be superseded after striking (see Th. Mommsen, St. i, 28-31 and 217-18) or that two colleges could hold office simultaneously, we may not assign more than three moneyers to any one year. It is noteworthy that when Sulla perhaps wished to strike without using the Marian moneyers he found in office, he did so by reproducing the issues of three optimate moneyers of the second century (see on nos. 369-71). The chronologies of H. A. Grueber, BMCRR i, 189-91, for the late second and earlyfirstcenturies and of A. Alfoldi, Ned. Kunst.Jahrb. 1954,151, for 44-42 may be ruled out of court without further argument. There is no example of iteration of the moneyership. 8 There is no evidence for the identity of the presiding magistrate. • L. Coilius (no. 154), if an ancestor of C. Coilius Caldus, Cos. 94, did not confer Senatorial ancestry on him ([Q. Cicero], Comm. pet. 11 with M. Gelzer, Nobility, 35); L. Cassius Longinus (no. 413) remained an eques (Cicero, Plane. 58); and L. Mussidius Longus (no. 494) did not become a Senator, since Q. Varius Geminus, and not he, was the first Paelignian Senator (T. P. Wiseman, New men, 243). Note that the Praefecti Capuam Cumas, elected according to Fesrus, s.v. Praefecturae, do not figure in the lists of magistrates discussed in the text. 602
Moneyers course, it might be easier for one sort of person to be elected than another; the election of L. and C. Memies to the moneyership for the residue of the year 87 was doubtless as irregular as the election of Marius and Cinna to the consulship of 86 (Livy, Epit. lxxx); Messala advertised the fact diat he was moneyer in the year of his father's consulship (no. 435) and doubdess owed his election in part to that of his fadier ;J it also seems probable that although members of the great families could readily be elected moneyers, the people was not entirely unaware of the advantages of expertise and tended if possible to elect members of banking and commercial families.2 II
MONETARY MAGISTRATES OTHER THAN MONEYERS
It appears that moneyers were empowered by virtue of dieir office to convert each year an amount of bullion determined by die Senate into coin, and that certain odier magistrates could be specially empowered by the Senate to perform the same function (see the list on pp. 606-7). A problem is posed by certain magistrates other than moneyers apparently striking at the mint of Rome (for military issues see p. 604) without special authorisation from die Senate. Thus Q. Lutatius Cerco, A. Manlius and Cn. Nerius struck denarii or aurei, C. Fundanius denarii and quinarii, P. Sabinus, T. Cloulius and C. Egnatuleius quinarii (nos. 305, 381, 441, 326 and 331-3), all as Quaestors.3 In addition, M. Fannius and L. Critonius struck as Plebeian Aediles, P. Fourius Crassipes as Curule Aedile. The last three struck during die dominatio Cinnae and A. Manlius struck under Sulla; it would be unwise to deduce any general rule from instances falling in an untypical period. But it does seem diat die Quaestors (die immediate superiors of the moneyers, see p. 617) could strike coin by virtue of their office, aldiough the right was rarely exercised. Cn. Nerius functioned at a time when it was doubtless desirable to convert bullion into coin as fast as possible, Q. Lutatius Cerco perhaps struck when all the moneyers were temporarily unavailable. The remaining Quaestors seem to have struck in somewhat unusual circumstances; the quinarius, which they all struck, was revived to pay for the agrarian schemes of Marius and Saturninus in Cisalpine Gaul, where the quinarius (old victoriatus) was die unit of account (see p. 628); the Quaestors perhaps felt that so important a matter should remain in their hands. 1 1
1
Compare perhaps C. Norbanus, probably moneyer in 83 (no. 357), the year of his father's consulship, and the moneyers discussed on p. 86. R. Herzog, RE xvii, 1453-6; T. P. Wiseman, New men, 85, on nummularii and moneyers. Although members of gentes attested in the East, presumably mostly involved in business, do not enter public life as moneyers with any greater readiness than they enter it as Tribuni militum, it is probably worth recalling certain moneyers who seem to belong to great business families; thus the moneyer L. Minucius (no. 248) perhaps belonged to the same family as L. Minucius Basilus, who died in Greece and presumably had interests there (Cicero, de off. iii, 73; Valerius Maximus ix, 4, 1; his nephew and adopted son is perhaps the Minucius who appears as Ephebe at Pergamum, RE Minucius 7); the moneyers L. Cossutius Sabula (no. 395) and Q. Crepereius Rocus (no. 399) surely belonged to the two families with the same nomina active in the East (on the latter see now B. Levick and S. Jameson, JRS 1964, 98). For the age at election of a moneyer see p. 710. For the arguments against regarding the monetary magistrates Ap. Claudius and T. Manl(ius) as Quaestors see on no. 299.
603
Monetary magistrates III
MILITARY ISSUES
During three periods in the history of the Republic, issues signed by individuals were produced which were detached from the main-stream coinage of the mint of Rome1 - the Second Punic War, the Civil War between Sulla and his enemies, the prolonged wars from 49 onwards.2 The military coinage of die first period (nos. 59-111 and 125-31; see p. 12 for discussion of dates and mints) was, I think, produced under the overall control of the Senate. When A. Cornelius Mammilla and T. Otacilius Crassus, governors of Sardinia and Sicily in 216, asked for money, they were told there was none (Livy xxiii, 21, 4; cf. Valerius Maximus vii, 6, 1) iussique ipsi classibus atque exerdtibus suis consulere, they were ordered themselves to make provision for their fleets and armies.3 Whether this decree was regarded as authorising other commanders in the field to produce coinage also, whether each was specifically authorised or whether a general enabling decree was passed, I am fairly certain that all commanders who produced coinage regarded themselves as doing so in response to the wishes of the Senate. The dispersion of minting was presumably merely intended to avoid as far as possible the dangers likely to arise from transporting coin and to make the best possible use of resources (note the practice of overstriking local coins).4 Certainly the coinage of the Second Punic War provides no evidence for the view that commanders possessed the right of coinage.5 The issues of Sulla and the Sullani,6 of Caesar and his opponents, and of the Triumvirs and their contemporaries were in my view quite simply illegal.7 Sulla did not strike before the end of 83 (see p. 80), that is when the invasion of Italy was decided on and he no longer even formally recognised the authority of the Republican government; similarly Caesar struck only when the decision to cross the Rubicon was taken (see p. 89). For the Triumvirs the Lex Titia might perhaps be invoked; but it cannot explain the coinages of the Liberators or of men such as Q. Cornuficius and Q. Labienus. For all these coinages, the moneta castrensis of Lucan v, 380, the exigencies of war provided the reason and, insofar as one was needed, a justification could be found in the belief that the war was for die res publica. The context in which this moneta castrensis appears is clear evidence of its illegal status. 1
A great deal of coinage in the period of didrachm coinage under the control of the Censors was produced outside Rome, nos. 1-2, 13, 15-16, 23 and 37; since it is unsigned, there is little information to be gleaned from it about its administrative framework. See also n. 3 below. 2 For the Narbo issue see pp. 600-1, for the issues of T. Quinctius and Cn. Lentulus see on nos. 548-9. 3 It is not certain that Mammula ever produced coinage; for a possible issue of Crassus see no. 40; a mint certainly began to operate in Luceria also in this period, see no. 43. • Note also the issue struck on Corcyra, no. 101. The Senate apparently sometimes provided commanders in the field with bullion (Livy xxvii, io, 11-13, with p. 34). • Contra Th. Mommsen, RMtv, 376-7; for Roman commanders striking provincial or local coinages see M. H. Crawford, Coinage and money under the Roman Republic (forthcoming). • Note also the (probable) Marian issue of anonymous quinarii, no'. 373. The issue of Pompeius as Proconsul (no. 402) belongs in this context. 7 Contra, for instance, C. H. V. Sutherland, CRIP, 10. It is interesting that gold first makes its appearance as a major monetary metal in military issues.
604
4 SPECIAL FORMULAE I
ISSUES STRUCK FROM 'ARGENTUM PUBLICUM'
All official coinage was presumably made from metal owned by the Roman state1 and it is not obvious why certain issues should expressly advert to this fact. The issues in question are eight in number. (1) (2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
C. Fabius M. Lucilius Rufus L. Sentius P. Servilius Rullus L. Titurius Sabinus M. Fannius, L. Critonius Mn. Fonteius L. Iulius Bursio
EX-A-rv
rv r
/^G-PVB
A-rv r-A EX-A-r EX-A-r
The last three issues belong to the period 86-85 > th e y w e r e perhaps struck from the money left to the populus Romanus by Ptolemy Alexander I of Egyptj2 which probably arrived at Rome in the course of 86,3 and the unusual origin of the issues was perhaps felt to be important enough to justify the addition of the legends P-A and EX-A-r. The first four issues belong to the years 102-100, which fall within the heyday of the iusiurandum in legem, attached to laws as a mark of the sovereignty of the people;* the use of a formula recording the fact that coinage was struck ex argento publico perhaps reflects a climate of opinion in the formation of which assertion of the rights of the people played a prominent part.5 On part of the issue of L. Titurius Sabinus, there occurs either A- TV, or A", to identify the head of Tatius, or a palm-branch, in allusion to Roman success in the Social War. I have no explanation to offer of A- P V here.6 1
Note the variant title for a moneyer found in 42, IHIvir a(uro) p(ublico) f(eriundo), no. 494/1-9 (see also p. 599). For the identity of the testator see E. Badian, RM 1967, 178. E. Badian, RM 1967, 188-9 with n. 38. Appian, BC i, 131 with commentary of E. Gabba. For the Marian sympathies of the moheyers concerned see p. 730 with n. 7. The formulae s.c.d.t. (for which see on no. 385), p.e.s.c. (for which see below), d.p.p. (for which see on no. 312) and p.p. (for which see on no. 307) have nothing to do with argentum publicum; the issue no. 335 is not relevant in this connection {contra A. Klugmann, NZ 1878, 218).
605
Special formulae II
ISSUES STRUCK BY 'SENATUS CONSULTUM'1
Certain issues of the Republican coinage were apparently distinguished by being struck ex senatus consulto. But since all legal issues were produced under senatorial control (see p. 616), it is not very clear why this fact was sometimes expressly indicated. It is perhaps best to begin by listing the issues involved (for the variants piecunia) e(rogata) s(enatus) c(onsulto) and d(e) s(enatus) s(ententia), see nos. 329 and 355): (1) (2)
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
(u) (12)
(13) (14)
(15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20)
M. Sergius Silus L. Torquatus Cetegus Lentulus Marcelli f. Piso, Caepio L. C. Memies C. Licinius Macer C. Cassius, L. Salinator Q. Antonius Balbus C. Annius C. Valerius Flaccus Anonymous Sullan issue with cornucopiae C. Marius Capito Laterensis L. Procilius f. C. Naevius Balbus Ti. Claudius L. Rustius L. Farsuleius Mensor Cn. Lentulus
(21) P. Lentulus (22) L. Plaetorius
(23) Q. Pomponius Rufus (24) L. Axsius Naso (25) T. Vettius Sabinus
Quaestor Quaestor Moneyer Moneyer Quaestors Moneyers Moneyer Moneyers Praetor Proconsul Imperator —
ex. s.c. ex.s.c. ex.sx. p.e.s.c. (on part of issue only) ex.s.c. ex.sx. ex.sx. (on bronze only) d.s.s. (issue of bronze only) s.c. ex.sx. ex.sx. ex.s.c.
Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer Quaestor Curator denariis flandis Quaestor Quaestor Moneyer Moneyer Moneyer
sx. (on part of issue only) s.c. sx. sx. sx. sx. s.c. ex.sx. ex.s.c.
s.c. s.c. sx. sx. s.c.
K. Pink, Triumviri; Essays Mattingly, 55, offers nothing of value for this subject, see in particular the review of the former work by C. A. Hersh, NC 1952, 145; Pink never seems to have understood that the whole basis of his arrangement is fallacious. 606
Issues struck by senatus consultum (26) M. Plaetorius Cestianus (27) P. Galba (28) M. Plaetorius Cestianus (29) P. Ypsaeus (30) Sufenas (31) M. Scaurus, P. Hypsaeus (32) Faustus (33) C. Considius Nonianus (34) P. Crassus (35) Cn. Plancius (36) A. Plautius (37) Messala f. (38) Q. Sicinius, C. Coponius (39) (40) (41) (42)
Mn. Cordius Rufus T. Carisius L. Cestius, C. Norbanus Ti. Sempronius Graccus
(43) Q. Voconius Vitulus
Moneyer ex.s.c. or s.c. Curuleaedile s.c. Curuleaedile ex.sx. Moneyer s.c. Moneyer s.c. Curuleaediles ex.s.c. Moneyer s.c. (on part of issue only) Moneyer s.c. Moneyer s.c. Curuleaedile s.c. Curuleaedile s.c. Moneyer s.c. Moneyer, s.c. Praetor s.c. (on part of issue only) Moneyer s.c. (on part of issue only) Moneyer s.c. or ex.s.c. Praetors s.c. (on part of issue only) Quaestor designates Quaestor s.c. (on part of issue only) designates
Of these issues some at least were plainly struck in an emergency context, those of Q. Antonius Balbus and his Sullan enemies, that of Cn. Lentulus, that of Q. Sicinius with C. Coponius, finally those of L. Cestius widi C. Norbanus, of Ti. Sempronius Graccus and of Q. Voconius Vitulus. It may readily be believed in these cases that the Senate was induced to make special provision for the striking of coinage and that it entrusted the striking to the man who needed the coinage or to his deputy. In the remaining cases the coinage was produced only by a moneyer, Quaestor or Curule aedile, but according to no immediately apparent pattern. The arrangements made for the production of coinage ex senatus consulto were apparently as haphazard as those in force for the production of the routine coinage of the moneyers (for which see p. 618). Two points may nonetheless be made. Firsdy, the practice of marking an issue with EX- S- C,etc, began towards the end of the second century in a period when the financial administration of the Roman Republic was becoming increasingly complex. I believe that after the loosely controlled coinage system of the Second Punic War had been abandoned the Senate normally decided at the beginning of the year how much coinage was to be struck (see p. 616). It seems in principle likely that issues marked with EX- S- C,etc, were 607
Special formulae authorised separately later in the year.1 Detailed consideration of four particular years reinforces this conclusion. In 100 there were three moneyers, of whom the last, Lentulus Marcelli f., marked part of his issue p{ecunia) e(rogata) s{enatus) c(pnsulto)\ akhough die-links between the two parts of the issue are theoretically possible, none in fact occur, which suggests that the coinage produced s.c. was detached in time from die rest. The first issue of 87, that of L. Rubrius Dossenus, bears simply die moneyer's name, the second issue, that of L. C. Memies L.f. Gal., produced after die Marians gained control and therefore presumably specially audiorised, bears die mark EX- S- C. The issues of 81 are even more instructive. The first issue, diat of A. Postumius Albinus, is very large and is followed by the very small issue of L. Volumnius Strabo and die equally small first part of the issue of C. Marius Capito. All diis coinage bears simply die moneyers' names. The second part of die issue of C. Marius Capito is very large and bears die mark S- C; it appears diat diis moneyer was given special authorisation by the Senate, during the year and during die period of his striking coinage, to produce an additional batch of denarii. Finally, in 49 die coinage of die Quaestor Nerius and the moneyer Q. Sicinius was apparendy produced widiout special authorisation,2 die coinage of Q. Sicinius widi die Praetor C. Coponius bears die mark S* C; it was doubdess a special war issue.3 In die second place, the incidence of issues including pieces marked widi E X • S • C, etc., is highly suggestive. The thirty-four issues which are not obviously emergency issues may be tabulated thus: 115-101 B.C. 100-91 B.C. 90-81 B.C. 80-71 B.C.
3 out of 40 = 7% 2 „ 13=15%
70-61 B.C. 60-51 B.C.
4 out of 17 = 24% 9 „ 19=47%
5 9
50-46 B.C.
2
„ „
29 = 17% 23 = 39%
„
14 = 14%
It is clear diat by far the greatest concentration of diese issues falls between 80 and 51. The early part of die period is known to be one of recurrent financial crises (see p. 638) and it is possible that die financial administration of die Roman Republic was in this period conducted on such a hand-to-moudi basis that the Senate was frequendy unable or unwilling to decide at die beginning of the year how much coinage should be struck; instead it had recourse to specially audiorised issues during die year. 1
See Valerius Maximus vii, 6, 4 for a decree to melt down temple ornaments in 82; Cicero, fam. xi, 24, 2 for money decreed for Brutus in the middle of the year 43 (no coinage was actually struck, see P- 95); A. H. M. Jones, Studies, 101-2 for Imperial practice. The massive issues of late 91 (see p. 587) were presumably authorised by the Lex Papiria; hence no senatorial decree was necessary. * See Caesar, BC i, 6, 3; Appian, BC ii, 135; Dio xli, 3, 4 and 6, 3 for the financial dispositions of the Senate early in January 49. ' The later issues of the Pompeians are military issues pure and simple, see p. 604. 608
Issues struck by senatus consultum But perhaps more significant is the fact that at any rate the 50s were a period when the year sometimes began without elected magistrates apart from Tribunes or when the Senate was for some other reason prevented from functioning normally. In such circumstances the Senate presumably found it hard to make its regular annual authorisation of coinage. It is clearly not possible to maintain that in such circumstances all the coinage of the year had to be specially authorised; if the Senate proceeded as soon as possible, it was doubtless held that a regular annual authorisation had taken place. But this may have been inadequately done and it is noticeable that years of known disruption are marked by coinage struck s.c.; it is worth tabulating the correlation, most striking for the year 53.1 60 B.C. No decrees for two months (Cicero, ad An. i, 18, 7). P. Ypsaeus perhaps belongs in this year and strikes s.c.2 56 B.c. January occupied with Egyptian question (P. Stein, Senatssitzungen, 37-9); sortitio of Quaestors delayed (Cicero, ad Q. fr. ii, 3, 1; cf. ad Att. i, 14, 5; fam. i, 4,1); Consuls not invested formally with powers (Dio xxxix, 19, 3 with A. Magdelain, Imperium, 18-19). Faustus strikes part of his coinage s.c. 55 B.C. Interregnum (P. Stein, 44 n. 242). P. Crassus strikes s.c; A. Plautius and Cn. Plancius strike prolifically s.c. as Curule Aediles. 53 B.C. Interregnum till July. Messala f. strikes only coinage of this year s.c. 52 B.C.
Interregnum. Coinage apparently normal.
50 B.C. No Senatus consultum nisi de feriis Latinis by February (Cicero, fam. viii, 6,3). Perhaps no coinage this year, perhaps normal issue of Marcellinus. To sum up, it thus seems probable, though not absolutely certain, that routine coinage, although authorised by the Senate, bore no special mark and that only when an issue was separately authorised during the year was it marked with EX-S-C,etc. 3 1
Cicero, Sest. 74, actum nihil nisi de me, on the year 57 is clearly exaggerated; nonetheless, C. Considius Nonianus strikes s.c. in this year. ' Sufenas, who strikes i.e., is a near contemporary as moneyer, see p. 87. • This view is adumbrated by Th. Mommsen, RMw, 378; the argument of A. Alftildi, Gnomon 1954, 389-91, that EX • S • C, etc., appears on the coinage according to no discernible principle is unnecessarily despairing. The formulae d.s.s. on no. 297 and s.c.d.t. on no. 385 have nothing to do with issues by senatus consultum; the formula s.c. on no. 490 refers to the decree providing for the erection of Octavian's statue, on no. 497 to the military command conferred on Octavian.
609
5 ADMINISTRATION AND CONTROL The production of an issue of coinage under the Roman Republic involved two separate stages, which must be carefully distinguished. It was necessary both to decide what denominations were to be issued and to fix the total amount of coinage to be issued at any one time together with its distribution over the various denominations. Clear evidence exists that a law was necessary or at least customary for the initial adoption of a particular denomination or weight standard.1 When a large number of denominations were available it was presumably a matter of administrative discretion which ones were actually used and in what proportions. The total amount of coinage issued was normally under Senatorial control.2 These rules, with all others, broke down in the period of Civil War from 49 onwards. I
THE PEOPLE
Two laws governing the denominational structure of the Republican coinage are clearly attested, the Lex Clodia and the Lex Papiria3 (Pliny, NH xxxiii, 46 - is qui nunc victoriatus appellatur lege Clodia percussus est, the coin which is now called the victoriatus was (first) struck under die terms of the Lex Clodia, and mox lege Papiria semunciarii asses facti, soon the as was made semuncial under the terms of the Lex Papiria). The first of these, the Lex Clodia, effectively legalised the current practice with regard to the victoriatus, according to which this old coin weighing threequarters of a denarius was treated as half of a denarius (see p. 628), and at the same time perhaps authorised the issue of a new coin, of the weight of a quinarius and with more or less the types of the old victoriatus. The law was presumably, though not necessarily, passed shordy before the new quinarius was first struck in 101. It was doubdess tribunician, but its audior is not identifiable. Although there were considerable periods in the first century B.C. when the new quinarius was not issued, Pliny implies that the Lex Clodia continued to be regarded as the source of audiority for the issue of the quinarius to die end of die Republic and beyond. 1
Th. Mommsen, RMw, 363, discusses in general terms the involvement of the assemblies with monetary regulations; no evidence is cited for the view, 363-6, that the Consuls were specially involved. 1 A. Alfoldi, Gnomon 1954, 389-91, rightly emphasises senatorial involvement, although wrong in some details. ' E. Babelon, RN 1884, 36, 'La loi Plautia-Papiria', is largely a work of fiction. 6lO
The people The prime purpose of the Lex Papiria of 91 (for the date see p. 77, for the reasons behind it see p. 596) seems to have been to authorise the production of bronze, including the as, on a weight standard of half an ounce instead of an ounce. (The reason can hardly have been shortage of resources, cf. p. 616 below; it may have been felt that the restoration of the full uncial standard, see p. 596, had been poindess.) Its existence and function are confirmed by the bronze coins of semuncial weight standard probably of this year (no. 338) bearing the legend L.P.D.A.P. This should be expanded as lege Papiria de assis (or aeris) pondere} A second purpose of the law seems to have been to revive the sestertius. Rare sestertii of 91 and 90 (nos. 337/4 and 340/3) bear the legend E.L.P, most naturally expanded as e lege Papiria. The full title of the law was perhaps Lex Papiria de assis pondere et sestertio feriundo. It may be argued that mere revival of a denomination should not need a law, but the sestertius had not been struck for over a century and a law may have been regarded as necessary for this reason. Certainly it is impossible to believe that if a denomination lapsed for a few years a law was necessary to revive it. Particularly during the second century the small denominations in bronze were continually being dropped and revived and the as itself was not struck for some thirty-five years. On the analogy of the Lex Clodia, the Lex Papiria may be taken to have provided authority for the issue of the silver sestertius to the end of the Republic. Whether Augustus had the law in mind when he adopted the semuncial weight standard for his bronze coinage after the chaotic practice of the Civil Wars (see below, also p. 597 above) must remain uncertain. If the literary and numismatic evidence for the last stage in the reduction of the weight standard of the bronze coinage is clear and consistent, the opposite is true of the evidence for the earlier stages (and for their relationship with the silver coinage) and it is not obvious how much of the garbled testimony of the literary sources one should try to rescue. One may start with two complementary statements of Festus (s.w. Sextantari asses and Grave aes). Sextantari asses in usu esse coeperunt ex eo tempore, quo propter bellum Punicum secundum, quod cum Hannibale gestum est, decreverunt patres, ut ex assibus qui turn erant librari, fierent sextantari; per quos cum solvi coeptum esset, et populus aere alieno liberaretur, et privati, quibus debitum publice solvi oportebat, non magno detrimento adficerentur. 1
H. Gaebler, ZfN 1902,174 n. 5. Th. Mommsen's interpretation, lege Papiria de aerepublico, defended by H. WMeis,Kupferpragung, 78-9, is less satisfactory, since there is no evidence that the law concerned itself (or needed to concern itself, see p. 605) with the supply of bullion. Willers' argument, that the letters L . P . D . A . P cannot refer to a law authorising the semuncial weight standard because they appear only on a small part of the bronze of that standard, will not do; after c. 141 all denarii were tariffed at 16 asses, but only five issues bear the mark of value XVI. As for the suggestion of K. Pink, Triumviri monetalts, 32 and 58, that the Lex Papiria included a clause relating to 'special triumvirates', there is no evidence that these existed now or at any other time.
Administration and control Sextantal asses came into use when because of the Hannibalic War the Senate decreed that instead of being libra! asses should be sextantal; their intention was that when the latter were used for discharging obligations the Roman people would be relieved of its indebtedness and private individuals to whom the state owed money would not suffer serious loss. and grave aes dictum a pondere, quia deni asses, singuli pondo libras, efficiebant denarium, ab hoc ipso numero dictum. Sed bello Punico populus Romanus, pressus aere alieno, ex singulis assibus librariis senos fecit, qui tantundem, ut illi, valerent. Aes grave has this name because of its weight, for ten asses each weighing a pound made up a denarius, also accounting for its name. But during the (Second) Punic War the Roman people, hard pressed by debt, made six (sextantal) asses out of each libra! as, with the intention that a sextantal as should be worth as much as a libral as. The two passages tell the same story with minor variations; the first specifies correcdy (see p. 30) that the sextantal weight standard came in during the Second Punic War and ascribes the measure to the simple action of the Senate, the second wrongly associates the libral weight standard with the denarius (see p. 37 n. 4) and asserts that the populus Romanus was responsible for the sextantal weight standard. Apart from the mistaken association of the libral weight standard with the denarius (universal in the Roman tradition, Varro, LL v, 174; Priscian, defig. num. 9; Volusius Maecianus, Distr. 74), Festus' story is consistent with the numismatic evidence. The version involving action by the populus Romanus seems preferable and a lex de assibus sextantariis should be assumed. But the introduction of the sextantal weight standard was only one stage in the introduction of the denarius coinage to replace Rome's debased quadrigati. I have argued (p. 24) that the denarius coinage was a single unified system, including three gold denominations, the denarius and its fractions, the victoriatus and bronze, and it is also apparent that a national debf was incurred to finance it (see p. 32). The full tide of the law of 211 was perhaps lex de assibus sextantariis et de pecunia nova feriunda. Two modifications in the denarius coinage of the Republic (apart from those brought about without legislation under the stress of Civil War) must now be considered. The first of these is the appearance of the uncial weight standard, the second the retariffing of the denarius at sixteen instead often asses. Both are explicitly described only in Pliny's unsatisfactory account of the Republican coinage. After dealing with the earlier phases (see pp. 35-7), Pliny gives substantially the same account as Festus of the introduction of die sextantal weight standard, but mis-dates it to the First Punic War. He then gives some information on individual denominations and continues (xxxiii, 45) postea Hannibale urguente Q. Fabio Maximo dictatore (217 B.C.) 612
The people asses unciales facti, placuitque denarium XVI assibus permutari, quinarium octonis, sestertium quaternis,' afterwards, when Hannibal was pressing hard, in the dictatorship of Q. Fabius Maximus, the as was made uncial; it was then agreed that a denarius should be worth 16 asses, a quinarius 8 and a sestertius 4'. As Mommsen remarks,1 Pliny's account of the Republican coinage goes back at least in part to the same source as that of Festus. It is not clear whether Pliny's higher absolute dates are a variant from the same source, the version of a different source or die product of Pliny's imagination. But the fact of the uncial weight standard and the retariffing of the denarius should be accepted. The precise nature, however, of the laws or law involved is not obvious. Two other pieces of evidence may be brought to bear on the retariffing of the denarius, die five issues of denarii widi the mark of value XVI (nos. 224-8) and a fragmentary passage of Festus (s.v. Sesterti not[am]). It is probable, though not of course absolutely certain, diat the mark of value XVI appeared immediately after the retariffing of the denarius and then lapsed; the mark of value X doubtless reappeared because die name of the denarius remained unchanged. If die mark of value XVI is to be connected widi die retariffing, this fell in c. 141, and certainly a historically satisfactory account of die measure can be given on diis assumption (see p. 621). Pliny's date for die retariffing, before die introduction of the coin, is in any case impossible. It follows that any restoration of die passage of Festus which attempts to reconcile it widi Pliny's date for die retariffing cannot be right. In particular, to restore lege Flaminia and dien because of Pliny's Q. Fabio Maximo dictatore to associate the law widi C. Flaminius, Cos. 217, is impossible; Flaminius was dead before Fabius became Dictator and never in Rome during his tenure of the consulship. The following restoration is offered exempli gratia and tries to avoid making the passage tell us more than we know already. Sesterti not[am ait Verrius Flaccus signa continere] dupundi et semisis; q[uare sestertius dictus quasi semis] tertius; sed auctu" sesq[uiassis* eriam mine sestertius est;] apud antiquos autem [denarii denorum assium e-] rant et valebant d[ecusis,' qui dicebantur quadriga-] ti, bigati, quinquessis q[uinarii; denarius qui mine] est numerum aeris perduct[um habet ad XVI asses lege Fla-] minia minus solvendi; a[rgenti enim penuria premeba-] tur populus Romanus/ " The MS reading, which I have checked, is aucto, making no real sense and easily emended. * Compare sesquilibra, Cato, Agr. 23, 106. c Compare Festus, s.v. Sestertius. d Identical line length is not to be expected, since the use of abbreviations is inconsistent and line ends in the other column of the MS are irregular. 1
RMw, 288 n. 14. 613
Administration and control The passage may be translated as follows. Verrius Flaccus states that the mark of value of the sestertius contains the marks of the dupondius and the semis; the name of the sestertius derives from the fact that the semis is its third component; but even now when it is greater by an as and a semis, it is still a sestertius; originally, however, the denarius consisted of ten asses and was worth a decussis (it was also called quadrigatus or bigatus), the quinarius was worth a quinquessis; the denarius of the present day consists of sixteen asses as a result of the Lex Flaminia minus solvendi; for die Roman people was suffering from a shortage of silver. Akhough other names than that of a Flaminius may be restored, diere is a Flaminius available in die mid-second century, Leg. 154, who may be taken, perhaps as Tr. Pi. c. 141, as the author of a Lex Flaminia minus solvendi.1 The tide of die law is readily intelligible - die Roman state seems to have held diat bronze could be exchanged for silver at die Aerarium (see p. 626 n. 3) and die effect of the law will have been to reduce the amount of silver that had to be paid out for a given amount of bronze (for die motivation of die law, misunderstood by Festus, see p. 625). The new exchange rate between denarius and as created by die retariffing remained officially in force until die end of the denarius coinage, confirmed by the edict of M. Marius Gratidianus of 85 (see p. 620). An immediate consequence of the retariffing seems to have been the adoption of the sestertius instead of die as, as die Roman unit of account (see p. 621). Since die retariffing effectively devalued die as, die new method of accounting was perhaps introduced by senatus consultum in a deliberate attempt to obscure the fact of the devaluation. The evidence for the appearance of the uncial weight standard is unfortunately equivocal, but it seems almost certain, despite Pliny's indication to the contrary, that it emerged gradually and not as the result of a law or other enactment. From the very start of the denarius coinage widi its sextantal weight standard for die bronze, some issues (notably nos. 63-5 and 69) produced outside Rome were of uncial weight standard or less, presumably because of local shortages of bronze. By die time minting was concentrated at Rome in about 207, die weight standard there was somewhere between sextantal and uncial (no. 57). There was from this point a slow decline to a weight standard less than uncial. At no point in the decline can a stage be recognised from the coins at which the uncial weight standard could have been introduced. Traditionally,2 die two issues of'uncial' dupondii (nos. 56/1 and 69/1) are regarded as marking the introduction of the uncial weight standard. But no. 69/1 certainly belongs at the start of die denarius coinage and the anonymous issue should be placed not very far from die start (see discussion on pp. 11-12). Bodi are fiduciary 1 1
Pliny may well have found this Lex Flaminia in his source and jumped to the (wrong) conclusion that it belonged in 217. As in E. A. Sydenham, CRR, 33-4.
614
The people
issues of the period when a sextantal weight standard was in force. I conclude therefore that no specific enactment was ever made about the uncial weight standard and that Pliny's asses unciales facti merely preserves a memory of the fact that the weight standard was approximately uncial at the time of the retariffing of the denarius. The most important event in the history of the Republican coinage was of course its introduction to the city of Rome, on the date of which the literary tradition is divided between 269 and 268 (see pp. 42-3). It is argued there that control of the Republican coinage in its early years was in the hands of the Censors and the discrepancy is most readily explained by the supposition that the decision to inaugurate a coinage at Rome was taken by a law of 269 and that the decision was put into effect by the Censors in the following year (for the arrangements for issues outside Rome before 269 see below). A Lex Ogulnia Fabia de aere argento (? auro) flando feriundo should be postulated; Rotondi's hesitation over this law1 is the result of trust in a false account of the introduction of the sextantal weight standard. The denominational structure of the aes grave introduced under the law was perpetuated at a variety of weight standards to the end of the Republic, but the didrachm coinage introduced at the same time underwent a number of modifications in the course of its short life. These included both the production of silver fractions together with a range of token bronze fractions for the didrachm and the issuing of gold. All these features are paralleled in the Greek models from which the Roman didrachm coinage was derived and it is probable that they were provided for in the Lex Ogulnia Fabia. No separate authorisation was thus needed for the gold issue of 216. The didrachm coinage and aes grave in their early years declined gently in weight standard, doubdess as a result of purely administrative action. But the last years of this period of Roman coinage are marked by a drastic reduction in the weight standard of die aes grave and a severe debasement of the silver coinage (Zonaras viii, 26, 14). The first seems to have been at least in part a conscious act of policy and I should argue that a law was passed to put it into effect. Not only is the formal distinction readily apparent between coins of the semilibral weight standard and those of the preceding issue, but the Roman state seems to have taken great care to see that the amount spent on the Ludi Romani of 217 (after the reduction in weight standard see p. 43) weighed as much as the amount spent the previous year, although for secular purposes the new asses were worth as much as the old (see pp. 626-7). I Q 2 1 7 333,333} asses were spent (Livy xxii, 10, 7), in contrast to 200,000 previously (Dion. Hal. vii, 71, 2 and Ps-Asconius, 217 St, who both wrongly give the sum in sestertii rather than in asses, see p. 623). Since the new asses weighed 6 ounces and the asses of die preceding issue 10 ounces, 200,000 of the latter weighed the same as 333,333^ of the former (200,000 x -^ = 333,333^). The name of the law responsible for the change in weight standard was perhaps lex de assibus semilibralibus, 1
Leges publicae, 243.
615
Administration and control The semilibral weight standard lasted for perhaps two years before a further reduction took place, associated this time with a debasement of the silver coinage. The result was the collapse of the entire system, leading to the replacement of die didrachm coinage by the denarius coinage. Although no certainty is possible, it seems likely that die reduction and debasement were ad hoc measures and not the result of legislation. (The slight and short-lived debasement of 87 was probably also an ad hoc measure.) One curious law remains to be discussed, which reinforces the general conclusion that alterations in the denominational structure and in the weight or quality of the Republican coinage were properly a matter for legislation. It is the law recorded in one cryptic sentence of Pliny (xxxiii, 46), Livius Drusus in tribunatu plebei octavam partem aeris argento miscuit. Pliny does not distinguish between M. Livius Drusus, Tr. Pi. 122, and M. Livius Drusus, Tr. Pi. 91, but it seems certain diat die younger is meant. There is no trace of debasement of the silver coinage after eidier tribunate and Pliny's record of die law can only be explained on die assumption diat it was passed by die younger Livius Drusus in 91 and annulled widi die rest of his laws (Cicero, de leg. ii, 31; Asconius 68-9C; Cicero, de domo 41 and 50; de leg. ii, 14; Diodorus xxxvii, 10). The reason for die projected debasement of die silver coinage remains quite mysterious. Rome was able in the following- year and for some years thereafter to produce an enormous silver coinage widiout any apparent difficulty. Perhaps Livius Drusus believed diat his programme would be inordinately expensive to carry out. II
THE SENATE
By die mid-second century B.C. control of the financial resources of die Roman Republic was firmly in the hands of the Senate (Polybius vi, 13,1), and was exercised dirough the Quaestors. Polybius' caveat diat the Consul in Rome could help himself to money from die treasury is not borne out by the Livian narrative of die Second Punic War.1 The same narrative shows that part of die process of bringing the dictatorship under civilian control was die taking away of its financial independence.2 It is less clear what conditions were like before the Second Punic War. It has been argued (pp. 42-3) that die dating of die early Roman coinage suggests very strongly indeed diat die Censors were in some way responsible for die successive issues from 280 to 225. The precise nature of diis responsibility is puzzling, in particular how continuity was assured when the Censors resigned and before dieir successors were appointed and how die actual process of striking bullion into coin was arranged. The most reasonable suggestion seems to be diat, as in die second century, die Censors were merely executive officers of die Senate and set in motion 1 F. W. Walbank, on Polybius vi, 12, 8, is unduly cautious on this point. • Livy xxii, 23, 6-8, cf. xxviii, 45, 14.
616
The Senate a policy agreed on by that body which could then be carried out by junior magistrates, presumably Quaestors. Although it is theoretically conceivable that the production of coinage was contracted out, the stylistic continuity of both silver and bronze from 269 onwards (nos. 20-7) militates against this possibility.1 The issue of 225 was overtaken by the Second Illyrian War and the Second Punic War and for a decade coinage was produced on a hand-to-mouth basis (see pp. 600-1 and p. 604). From 211 onwards the coinage was, I think, effectively in the hands of three annually elected moneyers (see pp. 601-2) and the Censors had no further concern with it. Given overall Senatorial control, the standard procedure of the Roman Republic from this time onwards with regard to the amount of coinage to be produced may be reconstructed as follows. At the beginning of the year the Senate would meet to hear estimates of income and expenditure together with a statement on the surplus coinage in hand2 and to authorise die production of the required amount of coinage.3 The Quaestors presumably handed bullion over to the moneyers and received it back in the form of coin.4 From this coin, together widi any coin already in the aerarium, the Senate would from time to time authorise expenditure.5 The crucial problem, for the resolution of which there is no explicit evidence, is whether or not the system assumed diat all payments would normally be made in new coin (either of the current year or remaining from the previous year) or whedier 1
There is no evidence for the contracting out of the actual production of coinage at any period in Roman history; the moneyer L. Piso Fmgi (no. 340) is not the same man as the contractor for military supplies, and there is thus no reason to suppose that the moneyer contracted out the production of part of his issue to himself; nor can it be argued that P. Monetius soc.l. Philogenes, attested in CIL vi, 9953, worked at the production of coinage during the period when he was the slave of the societas which ultimately manumitted him (contra O. Hirschfeld, Verwaltungsbeamten, 185 n. 2). Melting down of metal was sometimes contracted out during the Empire, CIL xiv, 3642; vi, 8455, 8456, 791; for the contracting out of the production of a third-century Greek coinage, see H. Ross Holloway, Hieronymos, 33-6. 2 For a certain awareness of the working of the finances of the Roman state, see Cicero, de leg. iii, 41; [Sallust], Ep, ii. l, 3; cf. Aristotle, Rhet. i, 4. The Illviri mensarii appointed in 216 were special budgetary officials; note also the formula used by Livy to describe the sum granted to the Censors to spend, vectigal annuum decretum est, xl, 46, 16; cf. xliv, 16, 9. For stocks of coin see p. 618 n. 5 below. * In 209 the provision of bullion for coinage (Livy xxvii, 10, n - 1 3 with p. 34) formed part of quae Romae agenda erant (xxvii, 12, 1) before the year's operations commenced. Note that revenues from the provinces came in at the end of the year for which they were collected (in 44 - see p. 639) or at the beginning of the following year (in 45-44-Nic. Dam., Caes. 55; Appian, BC iii, 39; Dio xlv, 3,2; these revenues, intended for the Parthian War, were kept by Octavian) and that provision for provincial governors was normally made at the beginning of the year (e.g., Livy xl, 35, 3-4; Cicero, ad An. iii, 24,1). The provision of bullion for coinage is perhaps also mentioned in Cicero, Phil, vii, 1 (January-February 43), de Appia via el de moneta consul refert; the business could perhaps relate to the fabric of the temple of Juno Moneta; S. Weinstock (in conversation) took it to relate to the problem of Caesar's portrait on the coinage; I doubt this. In any case the existence of a regular authorisation of bullion for coinage follows from the occurrence at intervals of special authorisations (on which see p. 606). * The Quaestors' responsibility for testing the quality of the metal of the Carthaginian indemnity, Livy xxxii, 2, 1-2, is interesting in this connection. * For early examples of expenditure via the Quaestors note Polybius xxiii, 14, 5; SIG 674 = Sherk 9, line 68; SIG 688 = Sherk 10, B, line 13; Lucilius 428-9M; cf. O'Brien Moore, RE Supp. vi, 741.
617
Adtntntstration and control old coin would normally be stored and re-used, as it certainly was in 43 (see p. 640 n. 2). For on the answer to this question depends die possibility of correlating volume of coinage with state expenditure. Certainly some new coinage would normally have to be struck, for die aerarium from a very early date found itself in possession of foreign coinage which would not be acceptable in Italy.1 But it does not follow that denarii which came into the aerarium were melted down and made into new coin, a process which would undoubtedly have involved some loss.8 On balance I believe diat down to Sulla they were and regard two general considerations as relevant. A rule diat all coin coming into die aerarium had to be melted down and recoined would reduce die possibility of fraud;3 one could question a functionary on how he came to have a batch of new coin in his purse, one would have less reason to suspect a batch of old coin.4 And at only one point between 211 and 81 is there a gap in die sequence of Republican coinage such as to suggest that substantial stocks of old coin were being used for payments.5 But die strongest reason for believing that down to Sulla die Roman Republic was in normal times in die habit of making payments in new coin is die very close correlation which does in fact exist between volume of coinage and scale of expenditure from year to year (see p. 694). Even so, two cautions are necessary. The correlation between the volume of the coinage of die Roman Republic as defined in this book and the size of die payments being made can never be perfect, since much provincial revenue was coined on die spot and spent in die form of cistophori or Iberian denarii.6 And even if the Roman Republic was in the habit of making payments in old coin, exceptional expenditure would presumably still be reflected in increased coinage. Ill
THE MINT
We have little information on how die moneyers actually went about administering die production of the required amount of coinage, once diis was agreed.7 The most 1
Conspicuously from booty, also from taxation, see, for instance, Cicero, de domo 52; ad Ait. ii, 6, 2; i6>4• M. I Finley, / / Int. Conf. Earn. Hist, i, 22; considerations of prestige would have encouraged moneyers to discount this consideration. 1 For Imperial legislation against misconduct by mint officials see M. H. Crawford, NC 1968, 58; for possible examples of Republican misconduct see pp. 602 and 620. 1 The almost complete disappearance of the practice of overstriking once the chaotic conditions of the period of the Second Punic War were past perhaps suggests that the mint was in the habit of melting down all old coinage; sporadic examples of overstriking may then be regarded as the result of inserting old coins into the production process at an advanced stage; it is hard to see otherwise how coins came to be overstruck in the same year as they were originally issued (Table xvm, 110 and 111). * The mint clearly sometimes overproduced (see Pliny, NH xxxiii, 55-6 for stocks of coins at various points in Roman history); the result of overproduction one year could be spent next year and thus relieve the mint of the need to strike. ' For Roman use of the latter see M. H. Crawford, NC 1969, 79-84. ' For the technical operations involved see p. 569.
618
The mint serious problem is posed by the fact that of the three moneyers appointed in any given year only one or two might actually strike; quite apart from the fact that coins do not survive of enough moneyers to provide three a year between 211 and 45, one moneyer is attested by literary evidence of whom no coins are known (no. 347). The problem would not really be altered by the supposition that all these men struck a token issue which was not large enough to survive. The most plausible supposition is that as in everything else at Rome social status counted; compared with the period from c. 145 to 100 and with die 80s, the 70s, 60s and 50s were a period when relatively few moneyers struck; diose that did were on the whole of high social status (see also p. 711); if the year's authorisation of coinage was all produced during their periods of striking, that was just too bad for their humbler and now unknown colleagues.1 Great differences in die amounts of coinage produced by moneyers who were apparendy colleagues are also surprising (for instance nos. 357-8); they further suggest diat moneyers divided the year into periods and operated in turn. Presumably the agreed amount of coinage might all be required at one time radier than another; presumably also it might be required at a time which was not anticipated.2 One moneyer adds die words pri(mus) fl(avit) to his name (L. Flaminius Chilo, no. 485); an order of striking, the existence of which is implied by this formula, was doubdess agreed by the moneyers radier dian drawn by lot; Chilo, unlike his colleagues, was perhaps of Senatorial family.3 The notion of an order of striking is complicated by two factors: first, it is clear that in some years, notably 44 and 42, a moneyer might go back to striking after a period off duty;* second, issues were sometimes struck joindy by two (as no. 285/2) or three moneyers (as no. 285/3-7). The extent of administrative discretion and die identity of its possessors are alike unclear. Presumably once a denomination had been established by law it was for die Quaestors or the moneyers to decide whedier or not it should be struck in any given year (compare p. 611). Questions of metal content were normally a matter for legislation (see p. 616); but the debasements of 213-2125 and of 87 were presumably administrative measures; so presumably were the slight decline in die weight of die denarius soon after its institution and die more long-term and more considerable decline in die weight of the bronze coinage in die second century. Two points call for 1
We can be reasonably certain that in the year 44, for instance, all the coinage needed was produced in the first half of the year (see pp. 94-5); all four moneyers were involved, but presumably might not have been. * For the procedure when additional coinage was required see p. 606. ' No other moneyer explicitly draws attention to the fact that he struck first; the addition of the titulature IIIVIR to a moneyer's name is entirely haphazard, see p. 600. * One may argue that in these years conditions were exceptional; for Caesar's freedmen overseeing the mint see Suetonius, Caes. 76, for Caesar's overall financial control, exercised through Praefecti, Dio xliii, 45, 2; 48, 1 and 3. It will not do to argue with A. Alfoldi, SM 1966, 148, that the sharing of dies by the moneyers of 44 is the result of the presence in the mint of Caesar's freedmen; compare the sharing of dies by moneyers in the second century, p. 51. * As also the contemporary reduction of the weight standard of the bronze below a semilibral level.
619
Administration and control comment: around 170 and again in 115 the weight of the bronze coinage was raised quite dramatically;1 and around 170 a decision was taken virtually to eliminate the striking of the denarius, to be followed by another after 160 to start once more and then by a third around 145 to abandon the striking of the as. Remembering the initiative of Cato the Younger as Quaestor, I am inclined to regard the two raisings of the weight standard as quaestorian measures (mint officials had perhaps profited from the drop in the weight of die bronze coinage). The sequence of events leading up to the abandonment of the as were perhaps decided at a higher level; the abandonment of the as involved a change in the method of paying the army and soon brought about the need to retariff die as (see p. 625). Finally, it is clear that types could be chosen and put into use at very short notice; the kaleidoscopic succession of types in 44 is enough to prove this; it is also probable that part of the regular coinage of 46, not only daat struck by special authorisation, reflects the events of diat year (see on nos. 464-5). IV
MAGISTRATES
Apart ftom the use by Caesar of Praefecti to oversee the finances of die Republic (see p. 619 n. 4), only one case is known to me of involvement wida the coinage of magistrates other than diose concerned, direcdy or indirectly, with producing it. This is the action taken by the Praetors of 85, who, I believe, took steps to enforce observance of the official exchange rate of sixteen asses to one denarius (for which see p. 625). The semuncial reduction of 91 (see p. 611) and die dislocation of normal life caused by the events of the next few years had apparendy caused the nuntmus, here the denarius, to be tossed about, so that no-one knew its value (Cicero, de off. iii, 80; Pliny, NH xxxiii, 132; xxxiv, 27, is demonstrably in error).2 The Praetors presumably promised redress to anyone who was defrauded by the operation of irregular exchange rates. 1 2
On the second occasion production of the as was resumed after an intermission of some thirty years. For detailed argument see PCPhS 1968, 1; P. J. Goddard, SCMB 1969, 7 and 42, is of no interest; the attempt of J. R. Jones, BJCS 1971, 99, to disprove the existence of irregular exchange rates between as and denarius depends on the remarkable belief that the mean of 18 and 17 is 16.
620
6 ROMAN UNITS OF RECKONING UNDER THE REPUBLIC I
SESTERTIUS
In the historical period the Romans expressed a large number of assessments of value, from property qualifications to fines, in monetary terms; since these assessments of value were often politically important, it is clearly desirable to know what these monetary terms meant and whether they varied from one period to another.1 Confusion was sown, uncharacteristically, by Mommsen; the reality is in my view very simple and can be expressed in four propositions. The Romans officially reckoned in asses2 from earliest times down to the point at which the denarius was revalued at sixteen asses instead often asses;3 thereafter they officially reckoned in sestertii;4 all state assessments hitherto expressed as so many asses were now converted to the same number of sestertii;5 all state payments hitherto computed in asses were hereafter made in such a way that the same amount of silver was paid out.6 Individual practice of course did not always conform to the first two propositions, 1
Theearliest systematic attempt to relate Roman monetary terms to the coinage is that of J .A. Letronne, Considerations; basing his calculations on the Constantinian solidus, he establishes the weight of the Roman pound; since the denarius is described by Roman authors as a fraction of a pound (see p. 594 n. 1), it is then possible to identify particular coins as denarii. * The practice developed from reckoning in pounds of bronze (Livy iv, 30, 3 with lucid commentary of R. M. Ogilvie); cf. Festus, s.v. Nancitor for pecunia in the Foedus Cassium. For reckoning in asses at the time of the retariffing see Pliny, NH xxxiii, 45 with p. 622 below. Sums of money in Livy, presumably deriving ultimately from official records, are normally in asses (iv, 16, 2; x, 46, 15; xxviii, 9, 17; xxix, 15, 9; xxxi, 13, 7; 20, 7; xxxvi, 40, 13; xliv, 5, 4) or amounts aeris or aeris gravis (Concordance i, 271-2; Epit. xlviii; cf. Valerius Maximus iv, 4, 10). For quadrigati and denarii in Livy see p. 630. It does not follow from the existence of a system of decimal subdivision of the sestertius (Volusius Maecianus 65, 73, 76, cf. 74-5) that the sestertius was used as a unit of reckoning while the denarius was still worth ten asses; the system is exposed as a late construction (so also A. Nagl, Rechentafel, 74-7, for different reasons) by the symbols it uses - I for 1/10 instead of for one as, i for 1/20 instead of for one semuncia. Sestertii occur in Cato, Agr. 14,3; 14,5; 21,5; 22, 3-4; 144, 3; 144,5; 145, 2, where they should be regarded as posthumous alterations of the text (for these see F. Leo, Geschichte des ro'm. Lit., 272 n. 1; A. Mazzarino, Introduzione al de agri cultura, esp. 85); for Cato's use of denarii and asses in reckoning see Plutarch, Cato Maior 4; Seneca, Epist. 94, 27. For sestertii in Livy see p. 631. 4 Of course small sums such as corn prices could still be expressed in asses. The Lex Valeria of 86 simply reduced debts to one quarter and did not affect the basic system of reckoning, contra Th. Mommsen, RMto, 383-4. 5 E. Meyer, Rom. Staat, 52-3, following H. Mattingly, JRS 1937, 106-7, seems to say that recorded assessments in asses are merely archaising conversions of first-century figures in sestertii; that is to carry scepticism too far, given the testimony of Polybius (see Table XLVIII, first entry). ' Payments to soldiers were doubtless those principally affected and the only ones for which explicit evidence survives; soldiers' pay could, for obvious reasons, not be casually increased or decreased, pace G. R. Watson, Historia 1958, 118. 621
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic but this does not affect their general validity; the official unit of reckoning in England now is the pound, despite the fact that surgeons express their prices in guineas and my College expresses the cost of wine consumed in pence; since die last two propositions related only to matters of official concern, there are no exceptions. The first problem to be considered is the expression in sestertii of assessments earlier expressed in asses; the evidence is best displayed in tabular form (see Table XLVIII, where die figures in denarii and asses record the state of affairs before c. 141, the figures in sestertii the state of affairs thereafter). It seems to me far more plausible to assume that the samefigurewas transferred from assessments in asses to assessments in sestertii than to argue, with Mommsen,1 that the sestertius (weighing a scruple of silver) and die libral as were originally equivalent and that figures could be expressed indifferently in one or die other; that figures so expressed were perpetuated unchanged when with die creation of die denarius system die sestertius was fixed at 2.5 asses; and that whenever figures involve the equivalence 2.5 asses = 1 sestertius = 1/4 denarius (an equivalence which came in with die denarius system) they must have beenfixedafter the as ceased to be libral.2 Against Mommsen's first point may be urged the high silver:bronze ratio of 1:240 which it implies,3 against the whole theory die fact that diere is a gap between the end of die libral as in 217 and die first appearance of die coin and hence of the word sestertius in 211.* It is not, by contrast, unreasonable to suppose thattheeffort of converting assessments in asses to assessments in sestertii when the retariffing took place seemed too great and that it was decided simply to write the assessments across from so many asses to the same number of sestertii; the decision was doubtless also politically convenient, since it would have had the effect of reducing the size of the prima classis, deliberately increased a few years earlier (see p. 631), but doubdess now swelling out of all proportion because of the effect of die influx of wealdi to Rome from the East (compare Aristotle, Pol. 1306b 9; 1308a 35). As for payments, die crucial piece of evidence is diat provided by Pliny (NH xxxiii, 45), 'placuitque denarium sedecim assibus permutari..., in militari tamen stipendio semper denarius pro decem assibus datus est', 'and it was decided that a denarius should exchange for sixteen asses, but in paying soldiers a denarius has always been given for each ten asses due to them'.6 How much was actually due to 1
RMvi, 302-4 (starting from the false premise that the denarius and the triental standard were contemporary), cf. 197, 206 and 292-4. The theory of K. Samwer and M. Bahrfeldt, NZ 1883,185-9, is no improvement. * RMti), 304, cf. 302 n. 40. * See below, p. 626 n. 8. * Varro, LL v, 173; Festus, s.v. Trientem tertium; Vitruvius iii, 1, nostri quartam denarii partem, quod efficiebatur ex duobus assibus et tertio semsse, sestertium nominaverunt. 1 The attempt of H. B. Mattingly, NC 1969,99-100, to discount the testimony of Pliny is astonishing; there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that Pliny was aware of the figures for donatives recorded by Livy and that he invented his account of the retariffing of the denarius to accommodate them. The accounting device recorded by Pliny is a perfectly reasonable one by which a decrease in soldiers' pay could be prevented.
622
Sestertius TABLE XLVIII. Denarii Census qualification 10,000 for prima classis D. Hal. iv, 16, 2 Pol. vi, 23, 15
Limit of application of Lex Voconia Fine for iniuria
Basic daily wage Nominal assessment
As and sestertius
Asses
Sestertii
100,000
IOOJOOO1
Livy i, 43,1
Gaius iii, 42 Inst. iii, 7, 2 (qualification of locupletiores liberti)
100,000
100,000
Cic, de re p. iii, 17 Gaius ii, 274
Ps-Asc. 247St Dio lvi, 102
25 Gell. xx, 1, 123 cf. xvi, 10, 8 Gaius iii, 223 Festus 508L 3 (see p. 624)
25 Coll. Mos. Rom. ii, 5, 5
1 (per jugerum rent) Livy xxxi, 13, 7
i(fine) Plut., Mar. 38* Val. Max. viii, 2, 3 ; (sale of hereditas) Gaius ii, 252; (sale of property) Cic, Rab. Post. 45 Val. Max. v, 2,10 Livy, Epit. Iv /LS8302, etc.; (prize in games) Gellius xviii, 13, 3
3 Cic, Rose. Com. 28
1
Compare the 100,000 sestertii owned by Vergil, Donatus, Vit. Verg. 13; cf. Vit. Prob. 25,000 drachmae = 25,000 denarii = 100,000 sestertii. ' The early origin of the passage is vouched for by the occurrence of the word crumena (A. Watson, JRS 1970, 112). * 4 chalkoi = 4 asses = 1 sestertius. 3
Certain passages, which have sometimes been thought to provide equivalences, but which do not in fact do so, have been ignored in the creation of this Table—Livy xxxiv, 46,3 with Plutarch, Cato Maior 10 (cf. R. Thomsen, ERC ii, 152-3) and Livy, Epit. xlviii with Polybius xxxi, 28, 5-6; the presumed normal cost of the Ludi Romani before 217,200,000 asses (see p. 627 n. 1), does notfigurein this Table because only the convertedfigureof 200,000 sestertii is attested (D. Hal. vii, 71, 2; Ps-Asconius 2i7St). The equestrian census in the late Republic was 400,000 sestertii; before c. 141 it will have been 400,000 asses; unless it had been altered, it cannot be represented by the census level of 1,000,000 asses recorded for 214 in Livy xxiv, 11, 7 (contra Cl. Nicolet, Ordre Equestre, 46-48; for other arguments against his view see P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 700). I see no way of deciding whether the sponsio of the Lex Crepereia (125 sestertii, Gaius iv, 95) bore any relation to either of the two primitive poenae sacramenti (50 and 500 asses, Gaius iv, 14).
623
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic them Pliny does not say, but a well-known passage of Polybius (vi, 39,12) records that in his time a Roman legionary was paid 2 obols a day = ^ drachma = § denarius.1 If the denarius had not been retariffed when he wrote, £ denarius would have equalled 3^ asses, if it had been, \ denarius would have equalled 5^ asses. Since the retariffing took place in c. 141 (see below) and since Polybius probably drew on his experience in the Third Carthaginian War in writing about legionary pay,2 the former view is more probable. It may be supported by two texts which suggest that a legionary was paid 3 asses a day ( = iT85 obols, rounded offby Polybius to 2 obols). They are Plutarch, Ti. Gr. 13, where Nasica offers the agrarian commissioners 3 asses a day each, presumably the lowest daily wage paid out by the Roman state,3 and Plautus, Most. 357, where 3 nummi are regarded as an appropriate wage for a soldier;4 the figure is not a standard Hellenistic one5 and is perhaps the equivalent of 3 asses (see Addenda). When the retariffing took place, paying the legions in silver was a relatively recent innovation (see below); it was clearly impossible to pay them less silver dian before and it doubdess seemed easier to pay their 1,080 asses per annum, after deductions, in denarii at the old rate of exchange rather than disturb things by computing a new rate of pay. The evidence of legionary pay makes it clear that sestertii were not yet used as units of reckoning when the denarius was retariffed. Although absolute certainty is unattainable, it seems to me highly probable that they were adopted (except for military pay) immediately after the retariffing, to disguise the fact that the as, die previous unit of reckoning, had in effect been devalued from 1/10 to 1/16 denarius.6 The as will now have disappeared as an official unit of reckoning. Since sestertii first appeared in 140,7 it is important to establish when asses were last used. The last lex sumptuaria to calculate in asses is die lex Licinia,8 ascribed by Macrobius to a P. Licinius Crassus Dives; it follows the Lex Didia of 143 and may dierefore be 1
The view (H. Mattingly, JRS 1937, 101-2) that Polybius is here talking of obols of the Aeginetic system rather than the Attic system is merely an insult to Polybius, see commentary of F. W. Walbank on ii, 15, 1; note also that the mina at vi, 58, 5 is an Attic mina of 100 drachms, not an Aeginetic mina of 70. • F. W. Walbank, Commentary on Polybius, 6. 3 For the use by Plutarch of obol to translate as see Pob. 11 with Gellius xi, l, 2, etc. (on the equivalences between sheep and cattle, and bronze). • The passage is cited by Letronne, Considerations, 27, following le Beau, Mimoires de littirature tiris des registres de I'Acadimie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres xli, 186, but not in recent literature. 6 G. T. Griffith, Mercenaries, 294-306. • A suggestion made in JRS 1970, 41 n. 10. 7 SIG 674 = Sherk 9, line 69 (140 B.C.); Gellius vi, 11, 9 (recording a speech of Aemilianus of 140 B.C.); Frontinus, Aq. i, 7 (on the cost of the Aqua Marcia, etc., finished and presumably costed after 140 B.C.); Livy, Epit. lv (138 B.C.); SIG 688 = Sherk 10, B, line 13; etc. 8 Macrobius, Sat. iii, 17, 9; Gellius ii, 24, 7; Festus, s.v. Centenariae. For earlier sumptuary limits in asses see Macrobius, Sat. iii, 17, 5; Gellius ii, 24, 3; Lucilius 1172M (compare U53-54! 1318); Tertullian, Apol. 6,1 (Lex Fannia - the calculation of Athenaeus vi, 108 in sestertii (2} drachms = 10 sestertii) is clearly an aberration); Gellius ii, 24, 2 (SC of 161 B.C.).
624
Sestertius attributed to Mucianus and to 142 or 141 (or just conceivably 140).1 If the changeover in reckoning is linked with die retariffing, this also may be dated c. 141. An answer to the question of why the Roman state was forced to retariff die denarius at 16 instead of 10 asses can perhaps be found by looking at the monetary history of the period preceding the retariffing. Soon after 160, after a decade or more when it was hardly struck, the denarius began to be produced again, now in very large quantities; around 145 the as, the commonest denomination down to 160, went out of production altogether (die last issue is that of C. Antestius, no. 219). The change from a coinage primarily in bronze to one primarily in silver is clearly to be related to a change in the mediod of paying the Roman army; the final step seems to have been taken just after a period when Rome was simultaneously involved in several prolonged foreign wars. In die course of all this, not only will die growing dominance of silver have led people to regard die as as no longer die unit on which the coinage as a whole was based, but the fact diat the stock of asses in circulation was no longer being leavened widi bright new pieces will also have reduced the attractiveness of die denomination. Presumably die unofficial valuation of the denarius in asses moved upwards from 10 to 16 and die state was forced to recognise die fact.2 It would be useful to be able to relate the history of the qualification for membership of the lowest census class to the history of Roman units of reckoning, but I cannot do so widi complete conviction. The highest figure, 11,000 asses, is given by Livy i, 43,7; 3 Polybius vi, 19,3, presumably written about 150, records 4,000 asses;4 die next figure, 1,500 asses, appears in Gellius xvi, 10,10 and Cicero, de re p. ii, 40. If die last figure is audientic as it stands, it presumably falls between about 150 and 141, since it is in asses.6 The conversion of die figure to 1,500 sestertii widi die retariffing presumably reversed die trend apparent up to this point to reduce die qualification for service in die legions; if recruiting became markedly more difficult as a result, this perhaps impelled C. Laelius, Cos. 140, and Ti. Gracchus after him to think of agrarian reform rather than lowering the qualification again.6 II
SILVER AND BRONZE
The earliest Roman coinage consisted of cast bronze asses weighing a pound and their fractions, together with silver didrachms weighing initially rather more than and eventually exacdy six scruples. Once it is admitted that Mommsen's equation 1
So in partrightlyI. Sauerwein, Leges sumptuariae, 94-104, who notices the significance of the use of sestertii, but misses the evidence for their appearance. The Lex Licinia appears to have replaced the Lex Fannia, after a lapse of time which impressed Macrobius. 1 So first T. V. Buttrey, ANSMusN 1957, 61-4; the argument is still valid whether bullion could or could not (as I believe) be brought to the mint to be coined. 3 The 12,500 asses of D. Hal. iv, 17, 2 was probably arrived at by halving the figure for the next to lowest class, R. M. Ogilvie on Livy i, 43, 7. * 400 drachmae = 4,000 asses. ' Cf. E. Gabba, Athenaeum 1949, 186 n. 3; P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 404, probably places the figure at too early a date. * I have no idea of where thefigureof 375 asses recorded by Gellius xvi, 10,10 fits into the picture. 625
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic between an as and a scruple of silver is wrong (see p. 622 above), we are left without any information on how die two component parts of the earliest Roman coinage were related to each other.1 Clearly it is likely that ad hoc equations could be made;2 and I have argued that die semilibral reduction was only possible because the new asses were placed in the same official relationship with silver as the old.3 But die earliest evidence of an official equation built into die monetary system is provided by die decussis of die last (quadrantal) weight reduction before die institution of die denarius system (no. 41/1); since for die denarius system die Romans decided to make die silver unit worth ten asses, it is difficult to avoid die conclusion diat when die decussis was produced it was worth die same as die then existing silver unit.4 If diis is right, die silver:bronze rado is 1:120, die same as diat displayed by die denarius system.5 When diis was created, gold, silver and bronze were all given marks of value to make their relationship explicit; one scruple of gold was worth 20 asses, four scruples of silver were worth 10 asses; gold:silver is here 1:8, silver: bronze 1:12c 8 A substantial problem remains. The earliest asses were simply coins weighing a pound of copper and presumably worth more or less just diat; on die odier hand die face value of both quadrantal and sextantal asses was also not far distant from diat of dieir metal content.7 Yet die purpose of die semilibral reduction was presumably to produce coins of die same face value as before but of lower metal 1
1
• •
6
• '
Gold presumably stood in a fixed relationship to silver, though we have little reliable information on what this was: the ratio of gold to silver was 1:10 in the Eastern Mediterranean after Alexander, 1:12 in the Western Mediterranean; early evidence from Rome (Livy i, 53, 3; 55, 8; etc.) is clearly fictional (so rightly Th. Mommsen, RMw, 197 n. 80); the Mars/Eagle gold was struck at a ratio to silver of 1:8, silver being thus deliberately over-valued in order to inspire confidence in the new denarius; a ratio of 1:10 was prescribed a propos of the Aetolian indemnity in 189; thereafter we are in the dark again until the age of Augustus; the equation between gold and silver in Livy xxxviii, 55, 6-12 occurs in a speech and is worthless as evidence (contra Th. Mommsen, RMw, 402 n. 115), the equation in Suetonius, Caes. 54 occurs in a context which, to say the least, does not inspire confidence in its reliability. But the chief problem, to which there is no answer known to me, is posed by the existence of a clearly token bronze coinage associated with the silver didrachm and a bronze coinage where face value and metal value approximated. Note the elogium of C. Duillius (Inscr. hal. xiii, 3, no. 69), where 3,700 nummi of gold+200,000300,000 nummi of silver = 2,900,000-3,400,000 pounds of bronze (1 silver nummus = io pounds of bronze?). JRS 1964, 31The nomos of 10 litrae common in Magna Graecia provided an obvious precedent; note also the Etruscan practice of tariffing coins in terms of units (or multiples or fractions thereof); see also p. 28 n. 4. Note also the unique coin worth 1/10 of a quadrigatus (no. 28/5) and therefore presumably an as; the coin is perhaps dimly recollected by Varro, LL v, 174, nummi denarii (in error for quadrigati) decuma libella ... et erat ex argento parva. 6 scruples of silver = 10 x 72 scruples (the theoretical weight of a quadrantal as) of bronze. For an earlier discussion of the contrast between the two systems see JRS 1964, 30-1; I am now convinced that the Oath-scene gold piece with the mark of value XXX is false (see p. 548). For the ratio between gold and silver in the denarius system see also p. 34 n. 1. A ratio of silver: bronze of 1:120 was normal for the Hellenistic world, M. J. Price, Essays Robinson, 103; see also E. S. G. Robinson, NC1964,41. As the Roman Republic coined and put into circulation ever greater quantities of silver (on a scale unparalleled in the Greek world), bronze became relatively more valuable; silver:bronze under Augustus is perhaps notional]y 1:6o.
626
Silver and bronze TABLE XLIX.
Growth in volume of production of as Number of issue
nation Decussis Quincussis Tressis Dupondius As Semis Triens Quadrans Sextans Uncia Semuncia Quamincia
14
18
21
24
25
26
27
35
36
38
57-8
39
41
t
17 19
.
365
19 3
200
7 6
ii
1 14
95
104
108 160
1OO 111
136 203
128
102
76 •
163 105 •
18 30 39 36 85 135 64 •
44
18
70
55
76 83
52 69 67
130
7 3 . 2 1
35 •
•
•
22
. 1168'
54 47 62 63 74
395 266 208 184
•
312
*
. 80 32 28 21
45
•
40 46 18 26 219 271
346 92
54 59 96 73 79
96 45 1064 172*
2 2
3
24«
•
Numbers of coins are taken from Haeberlin, unless otherwise stated. 1
Unique piece, not known to Haeberlin. * This enormous total is almost entirely accounted for by the existence of a single hoard, the Cerveteri hoard, which contained 1,569 asses of this issue and most of which passed into the collections studied by Haeberlin. • The figures in this column are those provided by the Paris collection. 4 This figure includes one piece with corn-ear (for the uncia with corn-ear, Haeberlin's no. 151, see Haeberlin's illustration).
content.1 At some stage, presumably with the quadrantal standard, this policy was apparently abandoned; an adjustment of state payments must be postulated as a necessary consequence. The occurrence of such an adjustment is attested by the structure of the coinage; for in all issues of aes grave down to and including the Prow series of semilibral standard the lowest denominations were normally the commonest; with the Prow series of post-semilibral standard the pattern changed markedly and the as became (as it was for the whole of the first half of the second century) the commonest denomination; clearly at this point and this point only were soldiers paid enough for asses to be needed in large quantities and for the as to become the characteristic component of legionary pay.2 By contrast, the levels of census assessments were apparently not changed.3 In conclusion, I should now wish to reconstruct the monetary history of the period from 218 to 211 thus. 1
See p. 626 n. 3 above. The gods were given offerings of the same metal content; the original cost of the Ludi Romani seems to have been 200,000 asses (reported as 200,000 sestertii or their equivalent by Pseudo-Asconius 2i7St; D. Hal. vii, 71, 2), in 217 they cost 333,333! asses (Livy xxii, 10, 7; cf. Plutarch, Fab. 4; also OGIS 480 with n. 14 for later (perhaps derivative) examples of figures made up of threes). * See Table XLK. * Livy xxiv, 11,7-8; see also p. 631.
627
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic Precious metal 218 217 216 215-214 214 213-212 211
Bronze
Didrachm of 6 scruples Unchanged (Gold issue) Unchanged
Libral, tariffed at intrinsic value Semilibral, dius becoming fiduciary Unchanged Post-semilibral (oriental to quadrantal); when quadrantal, tariffed at intrinsic value again (1/10 didrachm) (Decussis) Adjustment of state payments Silver debased Unchanged Denarius Sextantal
The creation of the denarius thus falls in two stages: a rash attempt to restore the bronze coinage as a coinage of intrinsic value led to pressure on the silver coinage, which was debased; Rome then took special measures to acquire bullion (see pp. 32-3) and was able to restore the silver coinage and relate it to a bronze coinage of sextantal as opposed to quadrantal standard. Thus, to resume this and the preceding section, state payments were adjusted in 214 to take account of the decline in the weight of the bronze coinage; assessments were converted from a given number of asses to the same number of sestertii with the retarifHng of the denarius in c. 141, they were not, as far as we know, systematically altered at any other time (for instance, to take account of the declining real value of the as). Ill
VICTORIATUS
With the creation of the denarius in 211, its half-piece, the quinarius, and its quarterpiece, the sestertius, were also introduced. Both lapsed after a few years, say by 207.1 Both were revived during the Social War and during the Civil War of 49-44. Thereafter the silver sestertius lapsed for good. The silver quinarius had both a more eventful and a longer history. Most notably, it was struck in spectacularly large quantities as part of the main-stream coinage of the Republic in 101 and 99-97, by Antonius (alone or widi Lepidus) in 43-42, by Antonius and Octavian in 39 and by Octavian in 29. When the silver quinarius was first revived, it was revived with the types of a victoriatus. The curious history of this coin provides the reason. Originally struck in order to provide a coin suitable for use in areas where the unit of reckoning was the drachma, it lapsed during dae 170s. It is clear that because the revived quinarius took over the types of the viaoriatus (Pliny, NH xxxiii, 46) it came to be called a victoriatus (Varro, LL x, 41). But it is equally clear daat such old victoriati as remained 1
For discussion of this date see pp. 34-5; for an isolated issue of quinarii see no. 156/2. 628
Victoriatus in circulation were by 101 already only worth half a denarius instead of three quarters as originally. The sums in Cato, Agr. 15, 1 only work out on the assumption that a denarius was worth 10 asses (libellae) and a victoriatus 5 asses {libellae).1 The reason for the drop in value is probably that in the absence of new victoriati die existing stock simply became as a whole more and more worn and less and less desirable.2 The lack of a mark of value doubdess facilitated the devaluation. It is also noticeable that die victoriatus as a unit of reckoning is particularly characteristic of die Rhone valley3 and of one area of the Italian peninsula, namely Cisalpine Gaul. It was carried in a triumph from Liguria in 177 (Livy xli, 13, 7). It occurs in the celebrated sententia Minuciorum (1LLRP 517). It is also of the same weight as the native currency of Cisalpine Gaul. These imitations of die drachmae of Massalia were struck from about 230 at least to the end of the second century and certainly remained in circulation into die first century. Over diis period dieir weight dropped from about 2.96 gr. to 2.00 gr.4 They are found all over Cisalpine Gaul, particularly north of the Po, and in Liguria. It is also wordi recording diat die Roman victoriatus penetrated to Cisalpine Gaul early and in large quantities, as in the Caltrano Vicentino and Gambolo hoards; die Masera hoard of the mid-second century still contains a notably high percentage of victoriati, by now wordi only half a denarius each. First-century hoards from Cisalpine Gaul are sometimes characterised by an enormous percentage of quinarii, never found elsewhere, for instance, the Sustinenza and Borzano hoards.5 If we now look at the occasions on which Rome struck quinarii, a significant link widi Gaul is apparent. Supplies and recruits came from Cisalpine Gaul in 90-89 (Plutarch, Sert. 4; Appian, BCi, 188, cf. Sisenna, frr. 29 and 72P);6 Marian forces, for whom perhaps the issue of quinarii, no. 373, was struck, concentrated in Cisalpine Gaul at the end of 82 (Appian, BC i, 410, 415, 418 and 422, widi commentary of E. Gabba on last two passages). In 43-42 Antonius and Lepidus were in Gaul or were governors in absence and part of their coinage alludes specifically to Lugdunum. It is not surprising to find diem striking the local denomination. In 39 and 29 there were veterans to be settled, partly in Cisalpine Gaul. I should argue diat die issues of 101 and 99-97 are to be linked widi Marius' colonising activity and widi Saturninus' leges agrariae. The moderate issue of 101 suggests diat Eporedia was by then envisaged for setdement, the enormous issues of 99-97 diat die lex agraria of 100 was 1
The text is gratuitously altered by E. Jungst and P. Thielscher, Philologus 1937, 331. The victoriatus thus suffered a fate similar to that of the as, see above, p. 625. The language of Pliny at NH xxxiii, 46, is qui nunc victoriatus appellalur lege Clodia percussus est, does not make it clear whether the Lex Clodia devalued the victoriatus or revived the quinarius, see p. 610. 8 Cicero, Font. 19; J. B. Colbert de Beaulieu, JNG 1966, 52. 4 A. Pautasso, Le mottete preromane, 100-6 (dates); 91-3 (weights). 6 See Coin hoards, nos. 113, 114, 162, 339 and 418. ' Not for the Italian side, U. Ewins, PBSR 1955, 74-5. For Gallic mercenaries see Appian, BC i, 219.
s
629
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic put into effect and that Rome struck money specially for the purpose, to finance the viritane settlement of Marius' veterans.1 Only if this took place is the tranquillity of the 90s comprehensible.2 IV
ROMAN COINAGE IN LIVY
Livy uses nummi quadrigati twice in connection with the proposed ransom ofprisoners after Cannae (xxii, 52, 2; 58, 4; cf. 59,18, where nummi alone is used), once in connection with assistance at Venusia to the survivors of Cannae (xxii, 54, 2). Polybius (vi, 58, 5) also discusses the proposed ransom after Cannae and gives the sum involved as 3 minae = 300 drachmae. It is possible to argue that this is the correct sum, interpreted as 300 denarii by later Roman writers and called 300 nummi quadrigati by Livy or his source because by then this was a synonym for denarii (Pliny, NH xxxiii, 46); but it is very odd diat nummi quadrigati occur in Livy only in a period when die didrachms now known (from their type) as quadrigati were in existence. I incline to the view that 300 quadrigati is die correct sum for die proposed ransom after Cannae, misunderstood by Polybius as 300 of die Roman coins (denarii = drachmae) current in his own day.3 Livy uses denarii in viii, 11,16, of die vectigal paid to die knights by die people of Capua; die whole episode is probably a late invention. Livy also uses denarii in xxi, 41,6, in a speech of P. Scipio; diis is likewise surely a late invention. Otherwise Livy uses denarii from xxxiii, 27, 3. onwards, in a period when the denarius was certainly in existence.4 Livy in my view uses bigati as a synonym for denarii;5 he does not mean by diem explicidy denarii widi biga types. 500 bigati occur in xxiii, 15, 15 (where diey are understood simply as 500 drachmae by Plutarch, Marc. 10), in die course of a highly romantic story figuring L. Bantius of Nola; it is reasonable to suppose diat die word, if not die whole story, is a late accretion to die historical tradition. Odierwise die word occurs from xxxi, 49, 2 (where it is restored) and certainly from xxxiii, 23, 7 onwards, in a period when the denarius was certainly in existence,6 and could be used to compute the value of booty. 1
For the Lex Agraria of 100 see Appian, BC i, 130, with commentary of E. Gabba; the hereditary connection of the Triumvir M. Antonius with Bononia, Suetonius, Aug. 17, perhaps arose from an involvement of his grandfather with land distribution in the area in 99. * The negotiations between Marius and the irpcoTOi 6v6pES of Plutarch, Mar. 30 were doubtless, over precisely this question. The problem is not well handled by P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 412-13. 8 Contra F. W. Walbank on Polybius vi, 58, 5. It is worth drawing attention to the i\ pounds of silver of Livy xxii, 23, 6, which = 120 quadrigati, which nearly = the 250 drachmae of Plutarch, Fab. 7. Note that the 500 denarii of Livy xxxiv, 50, 6 = the 500 drachmae of Plutarch, Flam. 13. Contrast Livy xxxii, 17, 2 where a ransom of 300, presumably Macedonian, nummi is involved. * Livy does not use quinarii; for victoriati in Livy see pp. 7 n. 2 and 629. 6 The extraordinary view of L. H. Neatby, AJA 1951, 241, that bigati were victoriati does not require refutation. * I believe that in general Livy's reports of sums of money go back to official records (compare K. Gast, Die zensorischen Bauberichte, esp. 128-9) > for argentum Oscense see NC 1969,82-3, cf. nurnmus in Livy xl, 47, 10; as far as cistophori are concerned, there does not seem to me yet to be decisive evidence for the date of their inception. 630
Roman coinage in Livy
Although not used as official Roman units of reckoning till c. 141, sestertii occur on six occasions in Livy, apparendy always in passages deriving from Valerius Annas,1 who may readily be regarded as mistakenly using the terminology of his own time. It is, however, not immediately apparent what original sums of money his sums of sestertii represent. One sum, the more dian 120,000,000 sestertii carried in the triumph of Aemilius Paullus (Livy xlv, 40,1), appears as a sum of over 6,000 talents in Polybius xviii, 35, 4. The first figure converts to 30,000,000 denarii, the second figure to 36,000,000 denarii; since these two sums are of the same order of magnitude, it is reasonable to hold that Valerius Antias and Polybius are substantially in agreement, but differ over precisely which items carried in the triumph are to be included in the total cash valuation.2 It follows that Valerius Antias may be taken as having carefully converted sums which he found in other units of reckoning into sestertii, not as having simply written across sums of denarii, etc., as the same number of sestertii. If this is right, we can see diat the sum of 30,000 sestertii in Livy xlv, 15, 2 is of considerable significance; it is die value of the minimum amount of property held by a freedman who was relieved from any restriction on tribal registration at the census of 169-168 and is likely, being an assessment, to have been expressed originally in asses. In Valerius Antias' day one sestertius was wordi four asses; the amount appearing in records made in 169-168 is therefore likely to have been 120,000 asses. Now not only is it inherendy probable that the property assessment which qualified a freedman to be registered in whatever tribe he wished was that of die prima classis (note diat die locupletiores liberti of Gaius iii, 42 and Inst. iii, 7,2 have die property of a member of die prima classis); die figure of 120,000 asses for the minimum property assessment of a member of die prima classis persistendy appears as an alternative to die figure given by Polybius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Livy.3 It seems to me to follow diat in 169-168 die figure of 120,000 asses was operational and that it was reduced between dien and (say) 150, when Polybius was putting togedier his study of Roman institutions ;4 diefigureof 100,000 asses (apart from being taken over by Dionysius and Livy) remained in force to be converted to the same number of sestertii widi die retariffing of the denarius in c. 141 (see p. 622). 1
Livy xxviii, 9, 16 with A. Klotz, Livius, 185; xlv, 15,2, with Klotz, 21 and 47; 40, 1; 43, 8; 44,14, with Klotz, 21 and 47; xlv, 4,1 follows a passage derived from Valerius Antias, Klotz, 95, and should clearly also be attributed to him. ' For varying computations in Greek sources see commentary of F. W. Walbank on Polybius xviii, 35, 4; remaining Latin sources exaggerate hopelessly. * Pliny, NH xxxiii, 43; Fesrus, s.v. Infra classem; cf. Schol. Bob. goSt; I take the 125,000 asses of Gellius vi (vii), 13, 1 to be a mere mistake for 120,000 asses; given this, it is significant that the figure is associated by Gellius with Cato, active in the period to which I wish to assign a property qualification for the prima classis of 120,000 asses. 4 I am unable to suggest a reason for the change, though it is worth recalling that Cato thought that the numbers of the holders of equi publici should be increased (ORF3, p. 37).
631
Roman units of reckoning under the Republic v
'NUMMUS'
Apparently ef South Italian or Sicilian origin (Varro, LL v, 173; Pollux ix, 79), the word nummus in Latin originally meant simply a coin, perhaps with the overtones of a standard coin. It seems to refer to a bronze unit when it occurs as a mark of value in the coinage of Teate and Venusia;1 it may mean a didrachm, an as or simply a coin in Plautus;2 it means a drachm when it occurs in Terence.3 Early official uses of nummi in the sense of sestertii are careful to use the phrase nummi sestertii or its Greek equivalent in full;4 the earliest certain use of nummus by itself to mean sestertius is in Lucilius, followed by Cicero, in Verr.2 v, 141-2.5 So the unspecified vopioi, 6(vo(jia and TSTpdvona in the Delos accounts of the early second century onwards cannot refer to Roman coins, but must refer to Greek coins, presumably West Greek;6 the standard coins at Tarentum, Heraclea and Syracuse were vopoi, at the last of which multiples of v6\xo\ were struck in large quantities under Hieron II. 1
BMC Italy, Teate 1; Venusia 19; cf. ILLRP 504, 674; J. Heurgon, BSFN 1963, 278. The Iguvine Tables move from reckoning in nummi and dupondii to reckoning in asses; I see no way of deciding whether nummi are here bronze or silver units, but suspect the former, contra J. Heurgon, inProblemi dell'Umbria, 116. Nummi are now also attested at Rossano di Vaglio, M. Lejeune, RAL 1971, 667. 2 Didrachm - True. 561; perhaps Pseud. 809; Rud. 1323-44; as - Most. 357; cf. T. Frank, AJP 1933, 370; A. Stazio, Numismatica 1948,19. The view of G. P. Shipp, Glotta 1955,144, that nummus may mean sestertius in Plautus is to be rejected, R. Thomsen, ERC ii, 148-9. 3 Heaut. tim. 606. * See p. 624 n. 7; add FIRA i, 7, line 48; 8, line 66; ILLRP 518 (105 B.C.); ILLRP 465 (Sullan). ILLRP 464 (Sullan) is too fragmentary for it to be clear what monetary notation appeared with the first figures to be mentioned. 4 Compare ILLRP 465a (68 B.C.); Vetter 2 (Lex Osca Tabulae Bantinae - later than the Lex Latina, M. Torelli, Arch. Class. 1969, 2, therefore first century); Vetter 233 (second century according to Vetter - doubtful). The Lucilius texts are 6s6W, 1049W, cf. 1050-51W. I believe that the progression of coins in Lucilius 500-1M: 'Praeterquam in pretio: primus (modius) semisse, secundus nummo, tertius iam pluris quam totus medimnus' is semis, sestertius (4 asses) and much more than 3 asses, the price of a medimnus if a modius cost a semis. The sense of nummus in Lucilius 327M, 440M and 492M is ambiguous. Attikon occurs at 1259M. « The compilers of the Delos accounts used the terms Sivdptov, fjuiov and dcxo-<5tpiov to record denarii, quinarii and asses respectively; the Tpoiraio96pa of Inscr. Del. 1443 A (Col. i), line 141; 1449 Aab (Col. ii), line 12; 1450 A, line 97 are not, I think, Roman victoriati, but perhaps coins of the Syracusan Democracy (BMC Sicily, Syracuse, no. 660).
632
7 COINAGE AND FINANCE Akhough it is probable that the aerarium kept detailed yearly accounts1 and that die Senate was responsible for drawing up at any rate an oudine budget at the beginning of each year (see p. 617), the evidence from which to reconstruct either budget or accounts is not now available. All that can be done is to establish die approximate pattern of yearly income and expenditure, on the basis of scattered pieces of information about the revenues of the provinces, etc., and about major expenses, notably on the army.2 Evidence may be drawn from two sources to check the picture built up in this way. There is in the first place occasional testimony concerning the contents of the aerarium or, more often, the absence of contents at a particular moment; this testimony may be compared widi die results achieved by adding up income and expenditure for the relevant periods of years. In the second place diere is the coinage of the Roman Republic. Nothing suggests that this was ever issued for any other purpose than to provide the means for state expenditure.3 If diis view is correct, it is reasonable to expert some correlation to exist between the amount of coinage and die volume of expenditure for a given year; the nature of the correlation will depend on whedier payments were regularly made in new coin or not. The balance of probability is that down to Sulla diey were made in new coin (see pp. 617-18) - die nature of die correlation which emerges provides the final confirmation.4 A tolerably accurate picture of income and expenditure under die Republic is welcome; the aerarium, particularly in the late Republic, was at die centre of political controversy, widi nobiles, Equites and populares all accused at one time or another of diverting die revenues of the Republic from their proper destination.5 Whoever it 1
For accounts of provincial governors see, for instance, Cicero, ad Att. vi, 7, 2 etc. (Cicero); in Pis. 61 (Piso); Livy, Epit. lvii (Aemilianus); Polybius xxiii, 14, 8 (L. Scipio); of a provincial Quaestor, Plutarch, Ti. Gr. 6; of the Consuls and the Quaestores Urbani, Cicero, Font. 2; ad Alt. iv, 11, 1. Cato paid five talents = 30,000 denarii for copies of the public accounts from Sulla to his own day (Plutarch, Cat. Min. 18); they were presumably substantial. R. Beigel, Rechnungswesen, 91-124, is careless and uninformative. * The best attempt is that of T. Frank, ESAR i, passim. As for the calculations of R. Knapowski, Staatshaushalt und Staatsrechnungen 49-4S, there is evidence neither for the form of the accounts which he presents (on ancient accounts see G. E. M. de Ste Croix in A. C. Littleton and B. S. Yamey, Accounting, 14-74, esp. 45-6) nor for most of the figures which he gives. 1 JRS 1970, 46 with nn. 57-62. * The view taken here of the function of the Republican coinage is also confirmed. 8 Sallust, BJ 31, 9; 41, 7; Hist, iii, 48M, 6, (nobiles) qui per militare nomen aerarium ... occupavere; Fionas ii, 1 (iii, 13), 6; ii, 5 (iii, 17), 3, Equites Romani tantapotestate subnixi.. . interceptis vectigalibus peculabantur suo iure rent publicam; Cicero, in Vat. 5, aerarium exhaurire in a list cf popularis sins, cf. 29.
633
Coinage and finance was who was responsible, the picture which can be built up of income and expenditure indicates clearly enough that someone was (see p. 695). Despite Cicero's plea for consideration towards the population of the Empire (de re p. iv, 7; cf. ii, 26), it is clear that much political argument in the late Republic was over the question of who should exploit the Empire, not over whether it should be exploited.1 The evidence for this conclusion is best presented in tabular form (Table LVIII with commentary); but first it is necessary to discuss the evidence for the balance in the aerarium at various times, then the evidence for the size of different issues of coinage. 1
'INOPIA'
Useful information on the Roman budget, if not year by year, at any rate over a period of years, may be derived from a consideration of the times at which the treasury was empty. Two problems arise. In the first place, it is not necessarily easy to distinguish between times when there was no reserve and times when income did not cover expenditure; secondly, assertions that the treasury was empty might be made for political reasons and be quite untrue; in general, the treasury may only be safely regarded as empty at a time when active steps to fill it are attested. For the early part of the period covered by the coinage of the Roman Republic no reliable information is available;2 but from the outbreak of the First Punic War the sources are tolerably forthcoming. The First Punic War and the Second Punic War down to 212 The Romans derived 100 talents a year from Hieron II of Syracuse from 263 onwards (Polybius i, 16,9; Zonaras viii, 16 for the eventual remission of the tribute); with the help of this money, pre-existing revenues (mainly from tributum and rents on state property) seem to have been on the whole adequate to finance the First Punic War. At any rate, we hear of financial difficulties only over the building in 242 of the fleet that finally won the war (Polybius i, 58, 9; 59, 6); the reduction in the weight standard of the silver coinage in 264 (with no. 22) precedes or accompanies the outbreak of war and cannot be regarded as caused by the war. The end of the war brought indemnities from Carthage (Polybius i, 62, 9; 63, 4), the year 229 tribute from Illyria (Polybius ii, 12, 3 with Livy xxii, 33, 5). The Second Punic War was a very different affair from the First. By the end of 214 Roman resources were exhausted and no money was available to pay necessary expenses; debasement of the silver coinage followed (see p. 569). Unfortunately, quite apart from the difficulty of estimating the amount of coinage produced between 1
The use by Ti. and C. Gracchus of the resources of Asia to finance land- and corn-distributions is significant in this context. ' It is perhaps worth remarking that the view that Carthage subsidised Rome during the Pyrrhic War is based on the erroneous belief that the types of Rome's first issue of silver are Carthaginian (see P- 713).
634
'Inopia' 280 and 214 (see p. 676), there is no possibility of relating this amount to income and expenditure, since there is no way of knowing to what extent there were reserves existing before 280 to be coined, nor of calculating expenditure.1 From 211 to 89 The creation of the denarius coinage was made possible by the deliberate seeking of new sources of revenue and by windfalls from booty (see p. 33); die treasury was not, I think, again empty till 89. For the first few years, there was probably only exceptionally a surplus; the weight standard of the bronze coinage was often much below what it should have been (see pp. 30 and 596), the weight standard of both the silver coinage and the bronze coinage tended to decline somewhat (see p. 595); diis picture of a treasury only just making ends meet is borne out by what happened over the repayment of the levies from citizens during and after the Second Punic War. The repayment, in three instalments, of the special levy of 210 was decided on in 204 (Livy xxix, 16,1-3); die third instalment, due in 200, could not be paid (Livy xxxi, 13,2-9) and ager publicus was given in lieu. Little progress seems to have been made also with die repayment of ordinary tributa; one tributum was repaid in 196 (Livy xxxiii, 42, 3), but 25^ tributa remained to be repaid widi the booty brought back by Cn. Manlius Vulso in 187 (Livy xxxix, 7,4~5).2 These difficulties occurred despite indemnities from Cardiage from 200 onwards,3 and other revenues from Spain and die East. Widi the victory of L. Aemilius Paullus, however, die treasury undoubtedly acquired a surplus; the value of the booty is reported as more dian 30,000,000 denarii (Livy xlv, 40, 1)4 and it enabled tributum to be suspended.6 In 157 die treasury held (at what point in die financial year we do not know) 17410 pounds of gold (worth 20,892,000 denarii), 22,070 pounds of silver (worth 2,648,400 denarii)6 and 1,533,850 denarii in cash. Booty continued to come in.7 1
The pay of a legionary during the First Punic War and the first half of the Second Punic War was certainly not as high as it was during the second century, contra T. Frank, ESAR i, 64 (see p. 627). * This booty was also used to finance games in 186, Livy xxxix, 22, 8, contra Pliny, NH xxxiii, 138. I assume on the basis of Cicero, de off. ii, 74 that tributum was not levied during minor wars (contra T. Frank, ESAR i, 379) and that the 254 tributa represent partly money levied during the Second Punic War, partly money levied on occasion thereafter. 9 Note also the sale of land to raise cash in 199, Livy xxxii, 7, 3. New portoria and vectigalia were instituted by the Censors of 179, Livy xl, 51, 8. * The testimony of Livy is corroborated by that of Polybius xviii, 35, 4 (see commentary of F. W. Walbank). * Pliny, NH xxxiii, 55-6; Valerius Maximus iv, 3, 8; Cicero, de off. ii, 76; Flac. 80; Phil, ii, 93; Plutarch, Paul. 38. * In calculating thesefiguresI assume a gold:silver ratio of 1:10 (see p. 626 n. 1) and 84 denarii to the pound of silver (see p. 594). For the use of gold at Rome, note the rewards to the killers of M. Fulvius Flaccus and C. Gracchus in 121. 7 The only possible evidence of shortage of metal in this period is provided by the decision to reopen the Macedonian mines in 158, which I connect with the reappearance of an extensive silver coinage a year later (p. 74); if there was a shortage, the volume of the coinage is sufficient evidence for its having been overcome (see below).
635
Coinage and finance It is against this background that the finances of the Gracchan period must be seen; I doubt if they provide evidence for serious financial difficulties. (a) The Senate's refusal to allow Aemilianus access to reserves for the Numantia campaign and die assignment to him instead of revenues not yet collected (Plutarch, Mor. 20ia-b) should be regarded as an act of political spite, not as a reaction to a shortage of resources.1 (b) The Senate's refusal to allot money for Ti. Gracchus' agrarian programme is equally irrelevant to die question of whether or not die treasury was empty; there was in any case die legacy of Attalus of Pergamum to use and Ti. Gracchus used it. (c) The position during the career of C. Gracchus is more complex. There is first his mysterious dissuasio legis (?) Aufeiae,2 apparently an attempt to maintain a high level of taxation in Asia, dien die Lex Sempronia de provincia Asia, certainly intended to improve the efficiency of tax-collection in Asia,3 finally his nova portoria.1 All this might suggest a serious need to increase the income of the Roman Republic. Certainly his enemies held that his lex frumeniaria in particular drained the treasury dry. 5 But the mere fact diat (?) Aufeius could propose a reduction in taxation suggests that the treasury was not in desperate straits; and despite his undoubtedly expensive programme, C. Gracchus felt able to take the step of reducing the amount deducted from a soldier's pay,6 perhaps also of providing governors with expense allowances (see p. 697). At this point the evidence of the coinage must be considered. The annual issues from c. 138 onwards are, almost widiout exception, very large indeed (see p. 699), many of diem on a scale hidierto unprecedented;7 in diese circumstances it is difficult to believe that die treasury was ever in serious difficulties. The attitude of C. Gracchus should be interpreted in terms of a belief that it was proper to exploit the Empire and to exploit it efficiendy. (d) The argument of Caepio against die lex frumentaria of Saturninus in 100 may conveniendy be dealt widi here; he docuit senatum aerarium pati non posse tantam largitionem, he informed the Senate diat die treasury could not stand such a large hand-out ([Cicero], ad Herennium i, 21); die Senate evidendy did not believe him (see p. 703) and we should not do so eidier. 1
The campaign of course brought in very little in the way of booty, see Pliny, NH xxxiii, 141 for a donative of only 7 denarii per man. * ORF', p. 187. * Cicero, in Verrem1 iii, 12; Appian, BC v, 17-18; Diodorus xxxv, 25; Schol. Bob. i57St; I need not enter into the question of whether the SC de agro Pergameno, attesting the presence oipublicani in Asia, antedates or postdates the Lex Sempronia. 4 Velleius ii, 6, 3. 6 Diodorus xxxv, 25; Cicero, de off. ii, 72; Tusc. disp. iii, 48; Sest. 103; Floras ii, 1 (iii, 13), 6. • Plutarch, C. Gr. 5; Asconius 68C provides no evidence for when the remission came to an end. ' This fact destroys the basis of the theory of H. C. Boren, AJP 1958, 140; AHR 1957-58, 890 = R. Seager (ed.), The crisis of the Roman Republic, 54, according to which the problem facing Ti. Gracchus was basically a recession in the city of Rome.
636
'Inopia' Unfortunately the figures for the reserve in 91 in Pliny are fragmentary; we know only that they included just under 405,208 denarii in cash, not how much bullion there was. It is clear, however, that by the end of the Social War the treasury was empty (for loss of revenue during the war see Cicero, de leg. agr. ii, 80; for supplies from Sicily not paid for, in Verr.2 ii, 5); in 89 die treasury desperately needed (and did not get) the booty from the capture of Asculum and was in consequence forced to sell land in Rome to get cash (Orosius v, 18, 26-7; cf. Plutarch, Pomp. 1 and 4). From 88 to 63 It seems that throughout this period die treasury was chronically short of money. There was none available for Sulla when he set off to fight Mithridates in 88 and temple treasures had to be sold, raising 9,000 pounds of gold (worth 10,800,000 denarii; Appian, Mith. 84); once in Greece, Sulla was forced to confiscate die treasures of Epidaurus, Olympia and Delphi, eventually giving die sanctuaries Theban land in compensation (Plutarch, 5M//. 12 and 19; Diod. xxxviii-xxxix, fr. 7; Pausanias ix, 7, 4); the capture of Athens brought in only 40 pounds of gold and 600 pounds of silver (Appian, Mith. 152) and after die batde of Orchomenos Sulla was quite glad to discuss peace (Appian, Mith. 217). Similarly, L. Valerius Flaccus in Asia in 85 was forced to appropriate money in die absence of proper provision from Rome (Dio xxx-xxxv, fr. 104); the government could not even finance its own supporters. Meanwhile, at Rome, that part of the legacy of Ptolemy Alexander I of Egypt which was in cash was finally collected and brought to Rome in 86,1 presumably because of a substantial need.2 And in die closing stages of the struggle against Sulla more temple treasures were melted down (Valerius Maximus vii, 6, 4); it was presumably dus metal diat the younger Marius took widi him to Praeneste, amounting to 14,000 pounds of gold and 6,000 pounds of silver (Pliny, NH xxxiii, 16; cf. Diod. xxxviii-xxxix, fr. 14 in general terms on his shortage of money). Some (perhaps all) of what was taken to Praeneste was captured by Sulla, who carried in addition in his triumph, according to Pliny, 15,000 pounds of gold and 115,000 pounds of silver; Sulla also had at least part of die money due from Asia after die expulsion of Mithridates (an indemnity from Mithridates, Plutarch, Sull. 22-3; from die province of Asia, arrears of tribute from 89 to 85 and an indemnity to cover the cost of the war, Appian, Mith. 259; Plutarch, Sull. 25 and 41; Licinianus 34-5 Bonn; for die collection of the money see Plutarch, Luc. 4). Despite all this, Sulla took a series of steps to raise money, quite apart from die proscriptions (see P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 303-4 for Sulla's remission of payment for goods of die proscribed purchased at auction); extra taxes were instituted to compensate for a shortage of cash (Appian, BC i, 1
For the date see p. 605; for debasement of the coinage in 87 see p. 569. * The state also profited from the Lex Valeria, reducing debts to a quarter, Cicero, Font. 1-5.
637
Coinage and finance 474-5) and at the same time cities were enabled to purchase immunities (Plutarch, Comp. Lys. et Sull. 3); in 81 a senatus consultum authorising the sale ofager publicus was passed (Cicero, de leg. agr. ii, 35).1 Shortage of money continued throughout the 70s; C. Cotta complained in 75 that there was no money (Sallust, Hist, ii, 47M, 6-7; cf. 46M), a complaint borne out by the letter of Pompeius from Spain (Hist, ii, 98M, 2 and 9); the aggression of Mithridates in 74 made matters even worse (Cicero, de imp. Pomp. 4 and 14; cf. the fears of Philippus as early as 78, Sallust, Hist, i, 77M, 8), though the Senate was still prepared to vote 18,000,000 denarii to Lucullus (Plutarch, Luc. 13). Against this background, the sending of a Quaestor to Cyrene, Roman property since 96, but totally neglected, is best seen as an attempt to get money.2 In 72 falls a bill to abolish remission of payment for goods of die proscribed purchased at auction (Sallust, Hist, iv M, 1; cf. Gellius xviii, 4, 4; also Cicero, in Verr.1 iii, 81 for earlier attempts). The evidence of die coinage suggests a slight easing of the situation from 71 or 70, with the defeat of Sertorius (see p. 705), but money continued to be short. There was not enough money to settle Pompeius' soldiers (Dio xxxviii, 5,1, reporting a speech of Pompeius in 59, cf. Cicero, in Verr.2 iii, 182) and in 67-66 another attempt was made to recover public money which had passed into private hands in die Sullan period (Asconius 73C; Cicero, Cluent. 94), this time from Sulla's son; but one should not regard the Republic as bankrupt in this period - 36,000,000 denarii were set aside for Pompeius' campaign against die pirates (Appian, Mith. 430; cf. Plutarch, Pomp. 25).3 From 62 to 44 Only with Rome's final defeat of Mithridates were her finances restored; Pompeius' settlement of the East not only more than doubled her annual revenues (see p. 695), but also produced a substantial amount of booty (Appian, Mith. 565 and 569-70). The new state of affairs made possible Cato's increase in die number of recipients of the corn-dole in 62 (Plutarch, Cat. Min. 26; Caes. 8) and the abolition oiportoria in Italy by die Lex Caecilia of 60; nor was there any shortage of money to finance the settlement of Pompeius' soldiers (Dio xxxviii, 1, 5; 5, 2; Cicero, ad An. i, 19,4;,cf. de domo 23). In these circumstances, it is difficult to believe that even the Lex Clodia abolishing all payment for the corn-dole seriously endangered the finances of the Republic4 or to give much credence to claims that die treasury was empty; there were complaints in a session of die Senate in April 56 about inopia pecumae (Cicero, adQ. fr. ii, 6 (5), 1),6 but the same session voted 10,000,000 denarii to Pompeius to finance It is also possible that Sulla sold the Spanish mines for cash, T. Frank, ESAR i, 257. S. I. Oost, CP 1963, 21; E. Badian, Rl, 34-5. The assertion of Cicero, de leg agr. ii, 47 (cf. 10), that the bill of Rullus would ruin the treasury was clearly called forth by the need to deceive his audience. Contra E. Badian, JRS 1965,112-13; 120-1. The complaints emphasise the loss of revenue resulting from the use of the agtr Campamu for agrarian distribution; I suspect that the complaints have largely sentimental reasons behind them, cf. Cicero, ad An. ii, 16,1-2; 17,1; 18, 2.
638
'Inopia' his cura annonae; in May 56, despite complaints of angustiae aerari (Cicero, Balb. 61; cf. deprov. cons. \i',de har. resp. 60; Plutarch, Caes. 21), the Senate agreed to take over paying for the four legions raised by Caesar on his own authority and hitherto paid for by himself.1 And die size of the reserve in 49 was clearly substantial, at least die 15,000 bars of gold, 30,000 bars of silver and 7,500,000 denarii in cash removed by Caesar (Pliny, NH xxxiii, 55-6). Any attempt to reconstruct in detail the finances of the First Civil War would be a waste of time;2 we have no idea how large the bars of gold and silver taken by Caesar from the aerarium were,3 nor how much the aerarium originally contained,4 nor how the total available was divided between Pompeius and Caesar.5 Both sides were short of money;6 funds were raised in Italy for Pompeius in 49 (Caesar, BC i, 6, 8; Dio xli, 6» 3; 9> 7)> but in 48 he was borrowing from Cicero,7 and Caesar claimed that Asia was ruined by his exactions (BC iii, 32, 5; cf. iii, 3,2); he himself was no better off; despite the 390,000,000 denarii carried in his triumph (Appian, BC ii, 421), he felt himself obliged partially to restore portoria in Italy and to reduce the number of people receiving the corn-dole; in 45 he sold public land (Dio xliii, 47,4); he was also thought to have plans for introducing an inheritance tax (Dio lv, 25, 5). At his death, there were 175,000,000 denarii in the temple of Ops, soon all spent by Antonius and Dolabella (Nic. Dam., FGH 90, fr. 130 = Caes. 28,110; Velleius ii, 60,4; Obsequens 68; Cicero, ad Att. xiv, 14,5-7; 18,1; Phil, i, 17; ii, 35 and 92-3; iii, 30; v, 11 and 15; etc.); Antonius was then obliged to resort to the sale of immunities to raise cash (Phil, i, 24; ii, 35 etc.). The revenues from the East due at the end of 45 had been kept by Octavian (p. 617 n. 3), those due at the end of 44 were diverted by Brutus (Asia - Cicero, Phil, x, 24; xiii, 32; Appian, BC iii, 259; iv, 18 and 316; Dio xlvii, 21,3; Syria - Brutus in Cicero, ad Brut, ii, 3,5; i, 11,1; Plutarch, Brut. 25; cf. Velleius ii, 62, 3) and it seems that 43 opened with the treasury empty (Cicero, ad Att. xvi, 14,4). Letters of Cicero in June and July 43 refer to the desperate state of the finances of the Republic (jam. xii, 30,4; ad Brut, i, 18, 5; cf. Dio xlvi, 31,3; 1
M. Gelzer, Caesar, 123-4. Caesar apparently started without anything in hand, see Cicero, ad Att. vi, 1, 25, with commentary of D. R. Shackleton Bailey, for his debt to Pompeius; cf. vii, 12, 2. 3 There is a hopeless clash between Pliny and Orosius vi, 15, 5 (4,13s pounds of gold, 900,000 pounds of silver). 4 The aerarium doubtless contained more than the proceeds of the vicesima libertatis, the distinctive source of income of the aerarium sanctius - we happen to hear that Caesar found 1,500 pounds of silphium in the aerarium (Pliny, NH xix, 40). 1 Pompeius was authorised to take money from the aerarium (Appian, BC ii, 135; Dio xli, 3, 4 and 6, 3; Caesar, BC i, 6, 3) and clearly took some (Ahenobarbus was provided with money at Corfinium, Caesar, BC i, 23, 4); when Rome was evacuated, the door of the aerarium was left open (Caesar, BC i, 14, 1), but soon closed (Cicero, ad Att. vii, 12, 2), apparently without using the keys; at this stage there was still money in the aerarium (Cicero, ad Att. vii, 21,2), which was eventually taken by Caesar (Cicero, ad Att. x, 4, 8; 8, 6; Dio xli, 17,1-2; Appian, BC ii, 164; Plutarch, Caes. 35; Pomp. 62; Fionas ii, 13 (iv, 2), 21; Orosius vi, 15, 5; Pliny, NH xxxiii, 55-6; Lucan iii, 112-168; the incident is ignored in Caesar, BC i, 33, 3). • Cicero, ad An. x, 14,1, for fears of proscriptions to raise cash; see also Dio xlii, so. ' Cicero, ad Att. xi, 2, 3; 3, 3; ct.JRS 1970, 46-7 n. 66. 1
639
Coinage and finance Appian, BC iii, 269; Cicero, ad Caes. tun. fr. 5).1 It is no wonder that no coinage was struck at Rome in the latter part of 44 arid the earlier part of 43 (see pp. 492-3 and 94-5)-2 From 43 to 31 With the creation of die Triumvirate on 27 November 43, die history of die treasury of die Republic is effectively at an end. The proscriptions partly solved the immediate problems of the Triumvirs over money (see commentary on no. 495); more long-term measures were the complete restoration of portoria in Italy and die introduction of direct taxation (Appian, BC iv, 19 and 132-146; Dio xlvii, 14, 2 - in die year 43; Appian, BC v, 282 and 540; Dio xlvii, 16-17; xlviii, 34; xlix, 15,3; 1, 10, 4 - in die years 42-31). Both Antonius and Octavian eventually found diemselves in financial difficulties; the last gold issues of the latter were on a reduced weight standard,3 die Legionary issue of denarii of the former was debased (see p. 569). Only when Octavian returned to Rome widi die wealdi of Egypt (to which Antonius had evidendy not had full access) was die spectre of inopia pecuniaefinallyremoved. Summary The treasury was empty in 213-212 and again at die end of 89; by die end of diis period, dierefore, all revenue accruing during it had been spent. Between 88 and 63, revenue was sometimes inadequate to cover expenses and never large enough to build up a surplus. After 62, a surplus seems to have existed, but diis had been exhausted by the end of 44; again, dierefore, all revenue accruing during the period had been spent by die end of it. II
SIZE OF ISSUES OF COINAGE
If it is accepted that die coinage of die Roman Republic was issued in order to pay the expenses of die state, it is clearly desirable to know how large die various issues were. Since diere is no ancient source which records diis explicidy, die information must be extracted from diose coins which survive. It is a fairly simple matter to count a sample of surviving coins from each issue. But it cannot be taken for granted diat all issues are now represented by the same percentage of dieir original bulk.4 Nor does diis procedure give us any idea of die absolute size of an issue, since there is no agreed figure for die survival rate of ancient coinages. These are dierefore die two basic problems which must be solved. 1 See Cicero,/am. xi, 10, 5, for D . Brutus using his own wealth. * The deliberations de moneta in early 43 (see p. 617 n. 3) will have come to a negative conclusion; a small amount of ready cash was available to be decreed to Octavian early in the year (Cicero, Phil, v, 53; vii, 10) and to Brutus in mid-summer (Cicero, fam. xi, 24, 2). ' M. Bahrfeldt, GoldmUnzenprOgung, pp. 185-6. • With the coinage of the Roman Republic from 211 onwards, however, I regard it as probable that the survival rate was fairly uniform; we are dealing with a coinage which circulated over a very wide area without interruption for a very long time.
640
Size of issues of coinage Relative size of issues The most obvious way to confirm or correct an estimate of the relative size of issues obtained by counting surviving coins is to count the dies used to produce them. If an issue surviving in x specimens used y dies and an issue surviving in 2x specimens used 2y dies, there is clearly some likelihood that the first issue was half the size of the second.1 But we are still no nearer knowing what relation the number of dies from which specimens survive to be observed bears to the number of dies which were actually used. Fortunately, for the Roman Republic it is possible to solve this problem. A. Denarii and quinarii from c. 157 onwards A number of Republican moneyers were considerate enough to use for denarii and quinarii numbered or lettered sequences of dies; and it is possible to observe without undue difficulty that in some cases a number or a letter never has more than one die.2 Now although the sequences in question are rarely complete, it is clear, for instance, that a sequence which goes with occasional gaps from I to LXXX is unlikely ever to have extended very far beyond LXXX (cf. pp. 588-9). It is therefore possible to compare, for the issues under discussion, the number of dies from which specimens survive to be observed with a theoretical maximum. It emerges from the available examples that the first figure is consistently some 90 % of the second figure. We may therefore assert with some confidence that if we count the number of dies used to strike the surviving specimens of an issue of denarii or quinarii during the Republic, the total will not be far from the theoretical maximum. Two problems remain, one practical, one theoretical. The practical problem is that to count all the dies used to strike during the Republic would be the work of several lifetimes. Tables L and Li therefore display the occurrence, in a representative sample of hoards, of all issues of denarii and quinarii struck under the Republic from c. 157 onwards; it is then possible to estimate the numbers of dies used for issues where they have not been counted by comparing them with issues where the dies have been counted. The theoretical problem is how to explain the discrepancy between the theoretical maximum number of dies for an issue and the number of dies actually attested. There seem to exist three possibilities. Either the missing dies were never used, or they were used and broke immediately, or their whole product disappeared from circulation without leaving a trace. The last possibility seems unlikely for every case; we should have to envisage all coins from all missing dies being lost to us 1
My remarks in NC 1965,153, are unduly pessimistic; the product of individual dies doubtless varied greatly, but these variations would average out in a large issue. * Lettered sequences of dies for bronze are unfortunately never of this type; for the different systems see p. 584. Dies used for plated coins are of course irrelevant in this connection, since the coins in question are to be regarded as ancient forgeries (see p. 560).
[cont. on p. 693] 641
Coinage and finance TABLE
L. Size of denarius issues, 157-31 B.c.
S
h
43 197/1 198/1 199/1 200/1
Anonymous with Victory 157Anonymous with Dioscuri 156 Saranus 155 Natta 155
201/1 202/1 203/1 204/1 205/1
C. Scribonius C. Talna C. Maianius L. Saufeius P.Sula
154 154 153 152
206/1 207/1 208/1 209/1
Safra Flaus Natta L. Itius C. Iunius
150 150 149 149 149
M. Saranus
Q. Libo L. Pitio C. Lucanus L. Cupiennius
148 148 148 147 147
219/la-b C. Antestius 219/ld-e C. Antestius 220/1 M. Iunius 221/1 Annius Rufus 222/1 Anonymous
146 146 145 144 143
21O/1
214/1 215/1 216/1 217/1 218/1
24 ? 3 8
30
6 3
96
?
13 7
10
7
?
3
3 8
1 1
29
10
2
1
33
13
2
•
2 .
9
1 1
43
12
6
3
2
5 .
4
5 7 3
9 14 9
9 47
11
4 8 3
7
3
2
2
9 6
8
7
6
3
4 7 9 6 4
2
3 3
10
? 4
5 6 . 9 6
4
223/1 224/1 225/1 226/1 227/1
C. Trigeminus L. Iulius L. Nomentanus C. Titinius M. Rusticus
142 141 141 141 140
228/1 228/2 229/1
C. Flaccus C. Flaccus M. Cota
140 140
2
•
6 4
15
5
7 9 3
39 35
10 10
1
6
7
13
6 3 3
69 .
8
6 3
3
2
1
5
1
26
7
4
3
7 9 . 3
6
2
30
4 .
35
16 19 26 13
3 6
4
5
2 2
4
20
3
11
4 32 14
1
4 8
11
1
2 1
6 6 7
4
.
4
2.
5
7 . 7 4 4
2
35 26 47
2
.
11
8 15
1
55
3
1
1
66 9
•
6
•
21
6
•
16 3 4
t
2 1
38 14 1
12 12 ,
1 1 .
3 3 .
1
6
1
1
1
•
2
•
•
2 2
2
1
6 •
3
•
•
•
•
•
6
( ,
2
The Syracuse hoard contains also three uncertain pieces of the Narbo issue.
642
2 2
22
40
139
9 ?
69 54
1
2
1
•
10
11
, 6 7 5 2 1 . . 1 1
Size of issues of coinage
I 26 ? 5
3 ?
?
1
1
4
2
6
2
3
?
63 89
[42] [59]
2 1 1
m 24 134 176 125
[74] [16] [89] [117] [83]
114 92 136 4 84
[76] [61]
92 112 123 82 110
[61] [75] [82] [55] [73]
23 157 181 36 44
15 [105] [121] [24] [29]
65 41 4 16 5
[43] [27] 5 16 6
3
8
2
3
11
4
2
14
4
•
13
3
3
9 ?
2 1
12
6
5
2
n n
7 4
4 3 2 1
2
1
15 26
3
2 1
3
3 l l l
2 1 1 2 »
1 2 1
6 5
7 7
7
2
l
3 2
2
4
l
1 2
7
•
. 2
7
•
•
•
2
3
1
6
2 .
3 3 3 3
2
3
4 9 5
l
l
2 1
1
2
•
2 1
#
l
2 2 . 1
3
4 6
4 9
4 4
•
i l
2 •
•
1
2
. l
1
2
2 1
2 2 2
1 1
2
1
1 2
1
1 1
1
[56]
(11)
7
(72)
[48]
12
10
The Awetrana hoard contains also two pieces of no. 299/ia or lb, one piece of no. 317/3 or no. 318/1 and one piece of no. 393/ia or lb. * In the case of all hoards which have been published and for which inspection has led me to correct the published record, the correct figures have simply been used for the Table without explicit note. For bibliography see Coin hoards, nos. 131-2,149,157,161-2,227,233,249,252,311,309,351,365, 417.440.45«» 475.488,493. S°5-«» 5 » - 3 -
643
Coinage and finance
LtO
TABLE L (COM.)
230/1 231/1
A. Spurilius C. Renius
139 138
232/1 233/1 234/1 235/1 236/1
Cn. Gellius P. Paetus Ti. Veturius Sex. Pompeius M. Tampilus
138 138 137 137 137
237/1 238/1 239/1 240/1 241/1
Cn. Trio L. Gragulus C. Serveilius C. Trigeminus L. Trebanius
136 136 136 135 135
242/1 243/1 244/1 245/1 246/1
C. Augurinus Ti. Augurinus C. Geminus M. Marcius C. Numitorius
135 134 134 134 133
247/1 248/1 249/1 250/1 252/1
P. Calpurnius L. Minucius P. Maenius M. Geminus L. Albinus
133 133 132 132 131
253/1 254/1 255/1 256/1 257/1
L. Opeimius M. Opeimius M. Acilius Q. Metellus M. Vargunteius
131 131 130 130 130
258/1 259/1 260/1 261/1 262/1
Sex. Caisar Q. Pilipus T. Cloulius Cn. Domitius Anonymous
129 129 128 128 128
263/1 264/1 265/1
M. Metellus4 C. Serveilius Q. Maximus
127 127
4
127
•
•
t
5
4
1
19
11
5
3 6
3
39
12
3
2
10
5
4 7 8
13 10
4 6
12
43 60 91 170
18 17 3
2
2
23
11
8
121
23
11
73
10 10 1
11
7 162 4 52
26 13
4
2 2
12 12 2
1
6
1
20
2 2 2
•
24
46 28 69
21
58
29 3 6 8 13
2
4 3 8 •
3 7
11
•
5
1
8 15 15 25 4
4 3
5 3 4
2
10
•
23 39 63 64 28
3
8
30 32 25
1
5
4 .
41
4 3 7 7
•
65
17
4
6 6 6 28
2
•
7 78 5O 42 4 36 1
4 .
•
1
•
3 1
5 3
1
7 4 8 4 2
4 4
3 4 5
•
•
1
4
2 10
11 21 1
t
2
•
1E 1
17
t
•
§
94
7 t
.2}
1
3
•
-2
8
5 •
«
Ricd
0
Banz
ftj
Petat
Date
•g
Issue
£ %
1 10
8 11
13 6 4 6 2
3 5 1
20 12
3 9 4 6
6 6
2
2
3
6
3
The 36 specimens of this issue in the Riccia hoard are clearly afreak- the issue was doubtless struck from rather less than 44 obverse dies.
644
tO
I Ul Ov VUI OV
OV
'
'f >' OUIUI^UI sllyiOOslVO
i *~^ »™~t»""» - J O v OO f >*Ul V5 O
I'M •
U, OOUsl w M N j 0 0
>•*
•
tO
•*
^ '^->* A O V9 OvU M » M0O00
M U i A OUl l t l l
I-*
U) M. Ul * . K)
»» »» Ov •* to
•
s]
•
U ) U | W ^ Ul
4>> M U ) • U
to •
•» 10 to • •
to U> to to •
MUlUlU N
0 0 OWO •» -fc-
»*»*»*
to »*
N**tJ*t
M »* .
•
AUtlUI
MvlMUl «
to
U >• O\ 0O 4k *
W (JUi
10 O U0 .£.
(0 •
A '• >' x KI A vj Ul OOslOVVO
10
W 10
00-J • *
Ul
h>
Ul •
tO Ul Ul •
* • * .
*r * " t T r-^ Ul f O U l v l Ul ^ U I U I O
| * U| Q iy|
Ov tO 'oSsT'oN s i s i O Ul Ov
Hfc t^ O O
10 • M.
O VU Ui lil
o vo KI •» '
COM)'
•
IO * . • »
M 00U • J U
Q
•
.
10 s i Ul
t* t* »» M O 0 0 O H > O
^
iyi to vy> ooi^i
n
.
>-» •
Ui s I U ^> VO
-fc N •* VO
to
to
Ul
KI Ul v l
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana2
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccare
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
I
Coinage and finance
JO
eg
i 1E
Date
Issue
Numbe
TABLE L (COM.)
266/1 267/1
C. Cassius T. Quinctius
126 126
68 36
268/1 269/1 270/1 271/1 273/1
N. Pictor C. Metellus M. Laeca Mn. Balbus Q. Labeo
126 125 125 125 124
7
274/1 275/1 276/1 277/1 278/1
C. Cato M. Fannius M.Carbo Q. Rufus C. Plutius
123 123 122 122 121
279/1 280/1 281/1 282/1 282/2
Carbo M. Tullius M. Philus M. Scaurus L. Cosconius
121 120
282/3 282/4 282/5 283/ia 283/lb
C. Malleolus L. Pomponius L. Licinus Q. Marcius, etc. C.F.L.R.Q.M.
118 118 118 117
284/ia 284/ib 285/1 285/2 286/1
M. Calidius, etc. Cn. Foulvius, etc. Cn. Domitius Q. Curtius, etc. M. Silus
116 116
287/1 289/1 290/1 291/1 292/1
Anonymous M. Cipius C. Font Mn. Lepidus P. Nerva
"4 114 113
293/1 294/1 295/1 296/1 297/1
L. Philippus T. Deidius L. Torquatus Cn. Blasio Ti.Q.
112 112 112 111 111
10
3
14
4
5
7
1
4 •
I 1 I I
4
11 1
•
15
5 7
5 3
4
13
21
2 11
36
4 4 24 30 19 16 12
7 18 8
19 16
5 5
12 10
8
18
4
8
"9
27
118 118
4
27 4
3
5
13 24 60 28 2
2
3 8
15
3
6
•
• .
•
•
5 3
5
3
1
"7
•
"5 "5 "5
•
#
"3 112
•
646
•
1
13
1
4 7
4 3 7
8 8
•
•
•
1
2 10 10
15 31
15
9 67 9
6
7
11 11
30
19
7
14 3?
7
1
12
2 2 2 10
t
1 ,
9
6
2
8 3 4 15 3
^
^H^ ^k^ ^H^
00UIAMM
^ ^
M
•» U l • » • » • »
•*
»»
vl OOf U 00
^ A ^1^^
Ul
M
^ ^ ^fcj^
• M
-
•» U l • K)
0\ i
M N Ul
»* M A
^^ (^ 00 ^£ (^
^O ^A ^^1 O£ ^J
•» M O* >*
" C A O C
A
oo oo'a'oN o
>l » U I W
»* U l • i^
••Mi-'
K » tl
•»
Ul
^J i * ^^ ^^ OJ
UT*OO\O ON-J
» w -
Ul •
00-J W £ O
S
^^ ^A ^A ft£
M UI vj oo
** ** »* 00 O OtUI
Ul M U l
M Ul •
Ul
00 O\ OvVW O
>• f U l l ' U I
UlUI O W « O\ ' M
' •»
oo •* >» • * M O MOO-JU,
>»
Ul
W f
00 •» \O • •
"J •
A- A N '
M
-
.
l *
* . O0 >c-.00.
#
•
4^ •*
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria*
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana1
Alvignano
San Giuliano
N •» K U> O
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
Casaleone
O • ~J • • *
1st Ul t* M M M * •
** ** U l U) •> » K
U U I U l I've
» M Ul A Ul <4 K U I U f
•» Ov k» 0 0 •
4kvj(J
u N >* M M «-)
M
M WfUIUI
Ul 0 0 * .
M V l OOUI •»
MiOUi 6 M
U l U l O OO*.
M
>»
* . - J O 00 •»
Coinage and finance
z
Date
Issue
ber
TABLE L (cottt.)
298/i 299/la 299/lb 300/1 301/1
L. Caesius Ap. Claudius, etc. T . Manlius, etc. C. Pulcher P. Laeca
111 110 110 109 109
302/1 303/1 304/1 305/1 306/1
L. Cilo Mn. Aquillius L. Memmius Q. Cerco L. Flaccus
108 108 108 108 107
307/la Mn. Fonteius6 307/1 b-d Mn. Fonteius5 308/ia M. Herennius 308/ib M. Herennius A. Manlius9 309/1
107 107 107 107
a s
E
CO
6
1
27 37
14\ 15/
89
25
14
35
10
1
10
45
22
25
2
3
1
19 15
5
8 8 14
3
10
6 7
7
2
{5
19
6
16
•
•
33
.
6
310/1 311/1 312/1 313/1 314/1
Cn. Sisena L. Asiagenus C. Sulpicius L. Memmius L. Cota
106 106 106 105
17
5
1
2
9 6
6 1
3 8 30 23 3
316/1 317/1 317/2 317/3 318/ia
L. L. L. L. C.
Balbus Saturninus Saturninus Saturninus Caldus
105 104 104 104 104
39
33
22
1
1
•
28 4
18 3
38 •
318/ib 319/1 320/1 321/1
C. Caldus Q. Thermus L. Caesar L. Caeicianus C. Fabius'
104 103 103
12 19
2
4
10
15 ,
102 102
8 •
2 1 1
5
C. Fabius' L. Iulius M. Rufus
102 101 101
322/ia 322/ib 323/1 6 6 7
5 6 20
2
10
5 9
•1
•J
3 1
This issue is surprisingly fully represented in the hoards, considering the small number of dies used to strike it; there is no obvious explanation. The prolific representation of these rare issues in the Berchidda hoard is clearly a freak. The two parts of this issue emerge very differently represented in the hoards; the picture might be more normal if the distribution of the pieces in the Monte Codruzzo hoard were known.
648
•
•»
•»
4». .
UJ •
i^\ OV 4k
O to OT M 00 •*
• 4k 10 UJ M
(OMtO
•» •
H>
0 0 10
UJ >-»
.—i.—. N , . UiONV0(yivO 00 UJ N U I U i
to'uj i^i •», OO ly<
•
Ui •
41. M M
•
>• 10 o v - J 4k
-^1 to to
10 Ov M
4k M »O
M M
M M UJ
-UJIAOUJ
10- U U l H
M
00 M 4k
«g .
vo •
•»
00
00
O\
I—lUI 'V l\ 4k ^ I - ^ M M I J ! I O O O O O
to to •U 10 I UJ to I •>> O
tO M •
• * to •
4kOV-
M
to to •
U ) OO-
kOtO-
U> tJ •
<~n u i O J > M t o o -
OOv
M to 4k to M O V
to
to
K> •* 1 0 N
>•
to 10
^-, M M M A UJU)M4kM ~J Kl O UJ O
o\ 00 NVOOv N VOOO MN)
•»
N
•
UJ VA fc>
Ov •» •» O O
,_, M M ,—N^> totOIOUJM OOVO0OM
Ul O\ OVu<' U I J O O
U Ul tJ oo a >• »
-J
M M M ^-,1^1 l^iU>O\4kt0 Q Ui N N ^
VOOOVOto'M O M Cj
(0 10 ^ .
tOtOtOtO
ON
M VTiUJOVMOO
oi
VO ONVO UJ 4k
|O
UJ to 4k • -J
4kM-4k-vo
tototoi*C>i
tOtOIOMVO - J O\ 00 O O
00O M
4k
MM K)4>vo<^i
t* J> UJ to
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Mailld
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana2
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
r—, UJ 4k UJ r—i OOOONUl OOUi >J O O
VA004^VOUJ
M
- V ^ M t O M
• UJ UJ 4k M
•
to<^i4kO\-
N »vlUI M
M l-fc M
M-JO\O\t0
UJ c
tovo-v]4k-
tOUJ VO O 4 k VO
Coinage and finance TABLE L {COM.)
E 325/1 326/1
L. Sentius C. Fundanius
101 101
11
327/1 328/1 329/ia-b 329/10-d 330/1
M. Serveilius P.Rullus Lentulus Mar. f. Lentulus Mar. f. Piso, Caepio
100
13
4
100 100 100 100
8 4
10
5
4
1
5
6
•
334/1 335/1 335/2 335/3»-g 335/9
L. Molo C. Mall, etc. C. Mall C. Mall A. Albinus
335/10 336/1 337/1 337/2 337/3
A. Albinus C. Bala D. Silanus D. Silanus D - Silanus
92 91 91 91
340/1 341/1 341/2 342/1 342/2
L. Piso Q. Titius Q. Titius8 C. Pansa C. Pansa
90 90 90 90 90
342/3 342/4 342/5 342/6 343/1
C. Pansa C. Pansa C. Pansa C. Pansa M. Cato
90 90 90 90 89
344/1 344/2 344/3 345/1 346/1
L. Sabinus L. Sabinus L. Sabinus Cn. Lentulus C. Censorinus
89 89 89 88 88
346/2 348/1 348/2
C. Censorinus L. Dossenus L. Dossenus
88 87 87
1
6
5 1
1 1 l
3
1
1
17
3
4
2
, 1
• 2
1
14
»5
3
22
3
7
1 2 20
12
106 211
39
38 5
400
1 10
16
6 5
• 4 2
46
20
20
32
5
•
4 4 .
18
7
10
1 1 ,
•
1
2 • 2 2
The 400 specimens of this part of the issue in the Fiesole hoard are clearly a freak - the evidence of the other hoards in the Table makes it clear that it was of about the same size as no. 341/1.
650
M
M
M O S M M M O M OOUl SO W U l O M 4k
M
^-iM^x SO 0 0 SO O -J O
.
M 4k M M M O SO 4k O Ul MM4kMUl
M MOUI
.
fU
Ol
OUMW
Ul M M M
MM SO Ul 4k Ul
KIUIUU
N
•
OS M
M A V O r-II—• M M Ov M M O X O O O v M
-si OVMM UI Oi OOUl O
OOMM
U» •
so
MM
M
A-
N • O
M
00
OV
M • • O N -
Ul•
OV
M M M M ~J O \ 4 k OOUl
sslUlOv
M00M
MM
MM'
•»J M O
MM
M M M
M M M U i M -
M U> - 4 4k U l O
Ut M •
U l • * ! OS OS 00
4k
M •
U< M • ut
Ul M M M • * oom w u i
MM ut * . Os
OOUl
Ul 4k Ul •
Ul OOvl S l f i
OO O - J
00 00
S
^
.
O
M «
Ui Ul O v M4kMM4k
uiOso' M 4 k M M M
M
v) b
O>
M
•
.
M
M
M •
M
SOOlMMOt --IMSOO00
.
N * .
-sl4kM~J4k OOSOUlMM
4k
00 •
Ul M M
'
O04t
&
M M U» •
«s| M •
M
M 00
M M
«4> N
M 4k • M
M M
M O S M M U t .
M M -
4k U l 4k
S
f W
M 00 "6
M M
M M . ^ M -5 M
4k
^ ^ J O O O V M M ul o » M O M U i - J
U. • U l
M
MsOMUiUI O O O U i O
Mm so M M4kUIUI00
M U I ' M
.
M M - U I
M
•
M U I 4k 4k • U l '
• -s) 4k
• • O> M
•
• Ul 4k M
Ul 004k
M
Ov M
M M
•
•
V J M O S M O I MOOOUiOO
4k MM4k UIMSOSOM
M
M
Ul • Ul Ui Ul
Ul • Ul Ul M
M • M M Ul
•
M
Ut
M
M
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
U I SO -qu
Ului 4kO\
M
M Ul
MM
M •
4k 4k
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria'
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana*
Alvignano
San Giuliano
W • Casaleone
Ul
M 0s
MM OO
Coinage and finance
Date
L. Dossenus L. C. Memies
87 87
350A/1 350A/2 351/1 352/1 353/1
Gargonius, etc. Anonymous M. Fannius, etc. L. Bursio0 Mn. Fonteius
86 86 86 85 85
353/2 354/1 356/1 357/1 359/2
Mn. Fonte'is C. Macer P. Crassipes C. Norbanus L. Sulla
85 84 84 83
360/1 361/1 362/1 363/1 364/1
P. Crepusius, etc. P. Crepusius C. Limetanus L. Censorinus Q. Balbus
82 82 82 82 83
365/1 366/1-3
C. Flaccus C. Annius, etc.
366/4 369/1
C. Annius, etc. L.Sulla M. Metellus
370/1 371/1 372/1 372/2 374/1
C. Serveilius Q. Maxiiaus A. AJbirus A. Albinus Q.C.M.P.I.
374/2 375/2 376/1 377/1 378/1
IMPER Q EX.S.C L. Strabo C. Capito
OO OO
379/1 379/2
L. Procilius L. Procilius
80 80
a CQ
3 S
£ S
fc E
t co
"d
c m
1 12 19 12
3 19 1
14 7
OO OO
348/3 349/1
3 6 7 / I J 3J 5
L (com.)
3
Issue
Numb
TABLE
" The 167 specimens of this issue in the Monte Codruzzo hoard are somewhat more than one would expect on the basis of its occurrence in the other hoards in the Table.
652
U>
>* U )
•-•
•
*»
ri
•»
h* *»- Ul
•»•» l-'Ul M U I O O O
•»
Ul
Ul M
Ul*
N
-J
Ul
00 00
U l N>
•» o o u
A7>'
A
vo
OJ U)
Ul
00\OVO>* KOOOOOO O
*
>-
•»
Kl M M •»
ooui *
f
u? UJ Ov
4 » o ooui O O O O U l O v
uiuiUvn » N O v O O O
Total OKIKIUIUI O v v l M O v O
h» U l Ul Ov -b. >* Ov UlMOOUlOO
Number of obverse dies
Aquileia
Terranova
»* M h* ^IOUIUIKI 0 * 0 0 0 0 0
* ^ •» •»
00
Bagheria3
Gallignano
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Ul Ul •
uiov K>
Kl
Bourgueil
N
•»
Avvetrana2
O\ Ov (• v l
-fe. •
O OON >-
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
o u t Kl >-> fc* t-h^lOvttl OvOOUlUlUl
lOUUl •>
Ul
VO vo • Ul
M 10
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
Kl »
O
'
-1^ N - J
MUI
•
•» Ul OOQ
OOU) 4>. OO
-b. to -t- vo
Ul Ul Ul O\
Ul.tx-
O«Wl O
O \ - 4 •» OJ
OOUi M to Ul
U>
•
M
^j
»* Ul **
vo ooui **
-*>. •*
ooo<J
4 i OO U M
to
o\
M. (sj
IF
Coinage and finance TABLE L (cm.)
I 80
380/1 382/1 383/1
C. Poblicius C. Balbus Ti. Claudius
79 79
384/1 385/1 385/2 385/3 385/4
L. Papius M. Volteius M. Volteius M. Volteius M. Volteius10
79 78 78 78 78
385/5 386/1 387/1 388/1 389/1
M. Volteius L. Cassius L. Flaccus P. Satrienus L. Rustius
78 78 77 77
L. Trio
76
L.Trio
76 75
390/1 390/2 391/1 391/2 391/3
C. Maxsumus C. Maxsumus C. Maxsumus
76
75
75
392/la 392/lb 393/« 393/ib 394/1
L. Mensor" L. Mensor Cn. Lentulus Cn. Lentulus C. Postumius
75 75 75
395/1 396/1 397/1 398/1 399/1
L. Sabula L. Cestianus P. Lentulus Q. Rufus Q. Rocus
74 74 74
400/1 401/1 403/1 404/1 405/1
L. Naso Mn. Aquillius Kalenus, etc. T. Sabinus M. Cestianus
71 71 70 70 69
10 11
75 74
73 72
The 37 specimens of this part of the issue in the Maccarese hoard are clearly a freak - it is no bigger than no. 385/3. This part of the issue is hopelessly under-represented in the hoards; there is no obvious explanation.
654
W
K) • »
H
-4
•»
•»
O (MU
k»
0O
»»
fcl
•
Ui
U)
.
u> n ^
•
U»
K>
O
•
nk
00*.
H
H
0 0 •*
•
O »
•»
O O O O ^S ^ t ^ ^
w
K)
O
M
Ul
O
•
^ ^
^^M^
•» •» o ^ ^
UW
^^^J
^^^^
O O
tO W09 00 O Ui O
UlW
^^4
*.
Ui
O
U>
(0
^ ^ ^
10
00*.
O
M
(J
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana*
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
I
Coinage and finance
Rome
405/2 405/3 405/4 405/5 406/1
M. Cestianus M. Cestianus M. Cestianus M. Cestianus P. Galba
69 69 69 69 69
• •
407/1 407/2 408/1 409/1 409/2
C. Geta C. Geta C. Piso M. Cestianus M. Cestianus
68 68 67 67 67
.
410/1 410/2 410/3 410/4 410/5
Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa
66 66 66
410/6 410/7 410/8 410/9 410/10
Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa Q. Musa
66
411/1 412/1 413/1 414/1 415/1
L. Torquatus L. Fabatus Longinus L. Brocchus Paullus Lepidus
65 64 63 63
416/1 417/1 418/1 418/2 419/1
Libo Libo, etc. M. Frugi M. Frugi M. Lepidus
62 62 61 61 61
419/2 419/3 420/1 420/2 421/1
M. Lepidus M. Lepidus P. Ypsaeus P. Ypsaeus Sufenas
61 61 60 60
422/la 422/lb
M. Scaurus, etc. M. Scaurus, etc.
58 58
z
Issue
Date
TABLE L (COM.)
•
66
66 66
66 66 66
.
62
59 . .
656
u •3
2
S
E
oo
«
i*
rUl'UIUI
r - '
Ul . Ul tsl
o\ O.
M x
•»
OOOO^l^UI
tsl
>-> U l U l
OOO
•
Ul
tsl
Kl Ul
-fc. tsl
OVH*
tsl
•»
• * tsl
5. &,
•»
•*
u>
tsl
l-»
tsl O» >*
O
7 7 " ^ - ? A
M
^ . ^ X O i ^ w
«
A A A _ 1 7
•>
^
OUivJi^UI
tslUiJ^OO
OOVO Ul --J
0 0 •»
tsl .
to •*
K>
o o oo tsl u< H>
tsl 4 k
I " O
•
UitslluiUI
tsl
tsl •* • • V© 0 0 O VO
HI
Ul
tsl CMO
tsl •»
•» •» * N
U l \O 0 0 ^ 1
00
tsl
.
U
•
I
^ ^ W W ^
i1
-
N .
.
A A A A A
«*Ul
•
•* .
.
-
•» •
•
(O •
•»
h> l ^ l ^ >» M.
A A A A A
v) Ul OOUl U
•
» . | s l - h >
tot'*
*
•
VO 0 0
Ul
'
_ _
Ul N
7T A
N M ~-J
Ul
t
l>*
IslUiKI^UI
"
UlVOVOtsI"
* * •
UtOxUiOO-
A
„
tslUl 4^4^
>i~J
U U
^Itsl-Ul
^J4^h'i->
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
MaiUe
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana 2
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
Coinage and finance TABLE
1
Q
423/1 424/1 425/1
C. Serveilius C. Nonianus Philippus
57 57 56
426/1 426/2 426/3 426/4
mli
Faustus Faustus Faustus Faustus C. Memmius
56 56 56 56 56
427/2 428/1 428/2 482/3 429/1
C. Memmius Q. Cassius Q. Cassius Q. Cassius P. Capito
56 55 55 55 55
429/2 430/1 431/1 432/1 433/1
P. Capito P. Crassus A. Plautius Cn. Plancius Brutus
55 55 55 55 54
433/2 434/1 434/2 435/1 436/1
Brutus Q. Rufus Q. Rufus Mcssala L. Vinicius
54 54 54 53 52
437/1 437/2-4 438/1 439/1 440/1
Caldus Caldus Ser. Sulpicius Marcellinus Q. Sidnius11
51 51 51 50
441/1 442/1 443/1 444/1 445/1
Nerius Mo. Acilius Caesar Q. Sicinius, etc Lentulus, etc.
445/2 445/3
Lentulus, etc. Lentulus, etc.
11
L {corn.)
The 32 specimens of this issue in the Alvignano hoard are somewhat more than one would expect on the basis of its occurrence in the other hoards in the Table.
658
A A
UIUI O O
t i v i >•
•» • »
K
Kl Kl
A "Cj"©? A
UUI
•» N O\ •
•
w o
O *•*
U OUlUl N O O I O M O
•»
•*
M Ul
U> 0 0 •» •» •»
tJUIMUIUI V O O W O )
T,—, A ^^,_,
4^ * I M > U> O I •» <->
Ul •
. •»
•*
M Ul
VA U l
K) •
(J
A A fT A *7
M M M M O O O ^ O O
ui wn HslU
•»
K w
X
N
T_'M',—•>—< U l « W 9iW OtNOl/lUI*O
i^i U) * . w
N
O
00
O\
Ul
•~J
« N OiUIUI Ok Ov O 9 ^ > O
II O
„ " „ „ „
O 00
^-n—> A A A
•» •»
UIUIUIUIUI U I U I O O O
H> •
•» •» •» M M 6 •
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Galli guano
Bourgueil
MaiUe
Vigatto
obverse dies
jk A< ^_ . „ Number of S >"« ^JO>O
Ul l^
-si • U l
Seica Mica
Awetrana*
Alvignano
4k- • * •
San Giuliano
v/i •» • 0 0
Casaleone
U» • O
MM
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
U3 (O
W
u u M a Si «* S' »>*
-fc. -fc. -6- -fc. C\ Ov Ov Ov 4^4^4^4^
» 50 50 JO »
J
4*. 4*. 4*- ** -b. O <7\ O> O\ O\ 4i Lu U) U> K)
o o o o
ssss
p' o' &' o' S'
Q. D. 0. 2. 2. >o •« •g.'g.'o.
CAUdUU
*.-&.*•*.*. Ol Ol O\ » U l •» O O O >©
O O B>
ooisi it
ii
*B > !
»pp
tJ 10 Kl
•* O
O
O
oo OO
o
W 0 u CO CO
3 3 3 CA CO tl U S n CA
61 (a
pppr r
\Q \Q \0
r <: p
Berchidda
Syracuse1
Fiesole
Masera
iccia
Banzi
Petacdato
Cani
Rome
Date
Issue
Number
to f
>
» Oi
»»
OV
o u
Oi N U * . UUiJi O
VO
•»
M> ^ 1
O
O\ '
(0
»
oui
«
O
Ul U> ^ OO VO O\~J U) 00
i U)
•»
HI .
uO uO w w \o O OU
\J\
Ui
*-*
•
•
\ou> O O
U)
O
W
ON
•»
•
•
•
o
IS
•*
w
O O OU
T T A A A ^
Ov
O •-' i" \
si
N
A ^^"
•
w ui
N
"
M
•*•
A^ T 7 " ^
(J VO
IU
OS •
0 0 LU
«
VO O O
^_ A A
<-U
M.
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana*
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
8"
Coinage and finance TABLE L (COM.)
465/2 465/3 465/4 465/5 467/1
C. Paetus C. Paetus C. Paetus C. Paetus Caesar
468/1 468/2 469/1 470/1 472/1
Caesar Caesar M. Poblidus M. Sabinus L. Celsus
472/2 473/1 473/2 474/1 474/2
L. Celsus Palicamis Palicanus L. Adsculus L. Adsculus
474/3 474/4 474/5 477/1 480/1-22
L. Adsculus L. Adsculus L. Adsculus Sex. Magnus L. Buca, etc.
482/1 483/1 483/2 484/1 485/1
Caesar Q. Nasidius Q. Nasidius C. Antonius L. Chilo
485/2 486/1 487/1 487/2 488/1
L. Chilo P. Lariscolus Capitolinus Capitolinus M. Antonius
488/2 489/1 489/2 490/1 490/3
M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius C. Caesar C. Caesar
494/16 494/17
P. Clodius P. Clodius 662
.o..o..o..o.p.
A A A A A UIUUIUU
AA U1U
.0..0.
U.I
II
*
_
.q,v> * . ^
A
N
to ** <*)
•» .
o.
A
A
^ A
I I
.P..P.5*?. • * .p.
A
u> I .
•*
A
A *o o» 0 , 4 0 ,
u i A
w I o \ •» i
Ov •
O\ '
O\
>JWU)U
* . U ) V*»
•» .
4>. •
•» M
U) •* ^
N • *•
A
N U I »» • t»
O OONU,£
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria8
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana1
Alvignano
San Ghiliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
§.
^
Coinage and finance
Num
Issue
I
494/18 494/19 494/21
P. Clodius P. Clodius P. Clodius
494/23 494/24 494/25 494/27 494/28
P. Clodius L. Regulus L. Regulus L. Regulus L. Regulus
494/29 494/30 494/31 494/32 494/33
L. L. L. C. C.
Regulus Regulus Regulus Varus Varus
494/36 494/37 494/38 494/39 494/40
C. C. C. L. L.
Varus Varus Varus Longus Longus
494/41 494/42 494/43 495/2 496/1
L. Longus L. Longus L. Longus M. Lepidus M. Antonius
496/2 496/3 497/2 497/3 500/1
M. Antonius M. Antonius C. Caesar C. Caesar C. Cassius
500/3 500/5 500/7 501/1 502/2
C. Cassius C. Cassius C. Cassius Brutus Brutus
503/1 504/1 505/2 505/3 505/5
Brutus Brutus C. Cassius C. Cassius C. Cassius
Date
TABLE L (COM.)
Q
ai
664
CO
0
CQ
a.
m
£££££
A A A A A wwuuiu
O\
£££££
UIUIUWUI
A7TAAA
fc)fc>*,
£ £ L 2
WHIM oou
00 ON
»J f
££££
WUJUJ w
U
OC
•» •
U»
wuwwui
AAA^A
•
£££2!i
A u> A UJ A U) A C u> o>
M
O\
A A A
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgeuil
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana 3
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
I.
I
Coinage and finance TABLE L (cont.)
506/2 507/2 508/2 508/3 509/2
Brutus Brutus Brutus Brutus Q. Cornuficius
509/4 509/5 510/1 511/2 511/3
Q. Cornuficius Q. Cornuficius Murcus Sex. Pompeius Sex. Pompeius
511/4 512/2 513/2 514/2 515/2
Sex. Pompeius C. Clodius M. Secundus C. Vaala L. Rurus
516/2 516/5 517/2 517/5 517/8
M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Barbatius M. Nerva L. Gellius
518/1 518/2 519/2 520/1 521/2
C. Caesar C. Caesar Cn. Ahenobarbus M. Antonius Cn. Ahenobarbus
522/2 522/4 523/1 524/2 525/2
L. Plancus L. Plancus Q. Salvius Q. Labienus Ti. Graccus
525/3 525/4 526/2 526/4 528/2
Ti. Graccus Ti. Graccus Q. Vitulus Q. Vitulus M. Antonius
528/3 529/2
M. Antonius C. Caesar
666
A A o o
O\
ooooo
o o o oo
A A A A A
OJ 1» UJ UJ UJ
OJ 1/^ OJ UJ UJ
A A A A A
MM"
A
A
A
- --
OOOVOOO
UJ UJ UJ
»*
Ul
»* U )
UUI M W U OO^OO
»« ^
U)
O O O O O
>*
•» N
•» O O O
, A A A A
^00 I
•*
O
/if OJ UJ
(jj
A A A A A o o o o o
Oi
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria3
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
MaiUe
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana 8
Alvignano
San Giulianc
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
Coinage and finance TABLE I. (COM.)
-3
i
co
529/3 531/1 532/1
C. Caesar P. Ventidius Domitius
533/2 534/2 534/3 536/1 536/2
M. Antonius C. Caesar C. Caesar M. Antonius M. Antonius
536/3 536/4 537/1 537/2 538/1
M. Antonius M. Antonius C. Caesar C. Caesar C. Caesar
538/2 539/1 540/2 542/1 542/2
C. Caesar M. Antonius C. Caesar M. Antonius M. Antonius
543/1 545/1 545/2 544/8 544/9
M. Antonius D. Turullius D. Turullius CHORTIUM PRAET. LEG XII ANTIQUAE
544/10 544/11 544/12 544/13 544/14
LEG XVII CLASSICAE LEG XVIII LYBICAE CHORTIS SPEC. LEG PRI LEG II
544/15 544/16 544/17 544/18 544/19
LEG III LEGIIII LEG IV LEGV LEG VI
544/20 544/21 544/22
LEG VII LEG VIII LEGVIIII
668
Nil!
N Ul
N
M
^ M
•
M>
•»
•»
I
O I w w >•
(0
o o
A A A o
•»
\O
.00
00.0
OJ ti Xjt UJ OJ
A A A A A
K)
^
^> ijj ^j
\O O O O O
(JJ
^ A A A A
£ I I .M
UPS)
o o o o o
Oi lAl 1>J UJ Utl
A A A A A
II
A o
MI I
Number of obverse dies
Total
Bagheria'
Aquileia
Terranova
Gallignano
Bourgueil
Maille
Vigatto
Seica Mica
Awetrana 2
Alvignano
San Giuliano
Casaleone
Maccarese
Pontecorvo
Monte Codruzzo
s.
I
Coinage and finance TABLE L (cont.)
Q
544/23 544/24
LEG IX LEG X
544/25 544/26 544/27 544/28 544/29
LEG XI LEG XII LEG XIII LEG XIIII LEG XIV
544/30 544/31 544/32 544/33 544/34
LEG XV LEG XVI LEG XVII LEG XVIII LEG XVIIII
544/35 544/36 544/37 544/38 544/39
LEG LEG LEG LEG LEG
546/1 546/2 546/3 546/4 546/6
Scaipus Scaipus Scarpus Scarpus Scarpus
546/7
Scarpus
XIX XX XXI XXII XXIII
670
Size of issues of coinage
o C Q
o)
ll
I 3
1
l
3
3 3
2 1
l
2 1 1
1
!4
7 9 2 5
5 l
4
l
4
2 4
l 2 1 1
2 1 1
1 1 1 1
2 2
4
2 1 1
21 10 13 1
i
7
l
14 14
l
2
7
4 1
1 6
5
1 l
3
i
ll 10
l
3
l
l
— —
11
4 7
The GaUignano hoard also contains 4 uncertain Legionary denarii, the Terranova hoard 8, the Aquileia hoard 4, the Bagheria hoard 1. Taken as a whole, the issue is by far the largest of the Triumviral period; given its size, its occurrence in large numbers in finds from all over the Mediterranean is unsurprising. But one should not exaggerate its size, particularly in relation to the financial obligations of M. Amonius; 864 obverse dies would produce about 25,920,000 denarii, enough for only one-third of a year's pay for 23 legions at post-Caesarian rates.
[Notes to Table L overleaf
671
Coinage and finance NOTES TO TABLE L The Table displays the occurrence of all denarius issues from 157 to 31 (except for issues now known only in one specimen) in 24 hoards selected because of their size and because the pattern of issues in them has not been distorted by selection in modern times (as far as is known). The figures in the last column represent the numbers of obverse dies to each issue or part of an issue; if the dies have been counted, the figure is without brackets; if the number of obverse dies has been calculated from the number of reverse dies, which have themselves been counted, the figure is between round brackets; if the number of obverse dies has been estimated on the basis of the number of specimens in the 24 selected hoards, the figure is between square brackets. The last two remarks require amplification. Where both obverse and reverse dies for an issue have been counted, it emerges that there are fewer obverse than reverse dies. In the second century the ratio of obverse to reverse dies seems to be 4:5; the first half of the issue of C. Antestius used 15 obverse and 23 reverse dies, that of N. Fabius Pictor 18 obverse and 24 reverse dies, the group with XVI shows a similar pattern. In the first century the ratio seems more like 9:10; the issue of P. Crepusius used 283 obverse and 296 reverse dies, the issues of 44 used 379 obverse and 414 reverse dies. For issues down to 96 I have therefore multiplied the number of reverse dies by 4/5 to calculate the number of obverse dies, for issues from 95 onwards I have multiplied by 9/10. I have also given between round brackets an adjusted total of obverse dies for issues struck with paired obverse and reverse dies (see p. 586); for in the case of these issues the life of an obverse die was governed by the presumably shorter life of the reverse die paired with it; as far as size of issue is concerned, an issue struck before 96 from x obverse dies paired with the same number of reverse dies will be comparable with an issue struck from — obverse dies used for their full life. As for the representation of different issues in the 24 selected hoards, it is immediately obvious that the representation of small issues is quite erratic; I have therefore taken no account of them in working out the basis on which to estimate obverse dies for issues where these have not been counted. Nor am I disturbed by the prospect of not distinguishing between issues which are 'of the greatest rarity', 'exceedingly rare', 'extremely rare', 'very rare' and 'rare'; an issue of denarii struck from less than 20 obverse dies before C. Gracchus and an issue struck from less than 50 obverse dies after C. Gracchus were equally incapable of paying a legion for a year and once an issue emerges as being as small as that it does not seem to me to matter very much to historians precisely how small it is. It is also apparent from the Table that issues of different periods are very differently represented:in the 24 selected hoards (aside from the erratic behaviour of some individual issues, for which see nn. 4-12 above). Thus the issues struck, for instance, between 157 and 146 have largely disappeared from circulation by the Triumviral period and almost completely so by the time of Augustus; by contrast issues of the Triumviral period are still in full circulation under Augustus; the first group of issues is consequently represented as fully as it could be in the 24 selected hoards, the second group of issues is not. It follows as a general rule that the later an issue is, the higher is the ratio of number of obverse dies to total of specimens in the 24 selected hoards; to this general rule there is one slight exception; those issues struck after the start of the Social War which passed into circulation in time to appear in large quantities in the hoards of the late 80s are more and not less heavily represented in the 24 selected hoards than the issues which immediately precede them. I have therefore estimated number of obverse dies from total of specimens in the 24 selected hoards on the following basis (for detailed justification see Fig. 5): Down to 126 dies:specimens = }:i From 125 to 92 dies:specimens = i§:i From 91 to 85 dies:specimens = i j : i From 841058 dies: specimens = 2:1 From 57 to 31 dies:specimens = 3:1 I do not of course claim extreme precision for the results of this process; they are, however, in my view of the right order of magnitude and provide for the first time a rational framework into which further work on the size of Republican issues can be fitted.
672
1-5©
1-00
150
140
130
120
no
100
80
90
60
Years Fig. 5. Relationship between hoard specimens and obverse dies. of h ° a r d specimens for The graph above plots the result of the sum mmbet number of obverse dies C. Antestius (1.53) Lentulus Marcelli f. (0.38) N. Fabius Pictor (1.38) C. Censorinus (Type 1 -0.99) Ti.Q (0.48) C. Censorinus (Type 2-0.70) Mn. Fonteius (0.89) P. Crepusius (0.53) M. Herennius (0.52) C. Annius T.f.T.n. (0.34) C. Fabius C.f. (0.60) C. Marius C.f. Capito (0.39) C. Fundanius (0.59) L. Papius (0.41)
fo,,owi
j M. Volteius (Type 3-0.62) M. Plaetorius Cestianus (Type 5 - 0.62) C. Piso L. f. Frugi (0.36) M. Plaetorius M.f. Cestianus (Type 2 - 0.57) L. Roscius Fabatus (0.37) L. Buca etc. (0.27)
TABLE
i 326/2 331/1 332/1 333/1 340/2 341/3 343/2 345/2 348/4 373/1 452/3 454/3 455/3 462/2 463/4 464/6 465/6 465/7 472/3 473/3 474/6 480/23 480/24 480/25 489/3 489/4 489/5 489/6 502/3 502/4 506/3 529/4 546/8
s C. Fundanius P. Sabinus T. Cloulius C. Egnatuleius L. Piso Q. Titius M.Cato Cn. Lentulus L. Dossenus Anonymous Caesar A.Nerva CRestio M. Cato Mn. Rufus T. Carisius C. Paetus C. Paetus L. Celsus Palicanus L. Acisculus M. Mettius L. Buca P. Macer M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius Brutus Brutus Brutus Octavian Scarpus
LI. Size of quinarius issues, 101-31 B.C.
s
i
s
5 16 26 26 9 38 70 53 30 17 . .
25 54 118 446 31 (117) 81 (184) (95) 44 . .
3 13 37 44 17 38 77 50 30 8
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B 9 20 29 87 20 42 135 86 36 20 . .
. . . . . . . . . .
10
.
10 . . . . . . . . .
3
.
. . . . . . . . . .
4 5 .
. . . . .
. 19 5 3
. .
. . . . .
. .
.
.
I
7 3 14 20 3 12 37 13 10 4 . .
. . . . . . . . .
.
|
.
. 1 4 74
.
.
2
. 49 . 106 . 2 2 4 5 628 1 81 3 250 3 403 6 392 2 203 4 97 o o o 5 25 0 0 o o 0 o o o o . o 7 2 26 . 5 4 7 o . 1 . 4 . 74 0
ig 82 [100] [225] [625] 78 [250] [400] [400] [200] [100]
[50]
[<3O] [ < 10] [14] [52] [10] [14]
[148] 1*
1
For bibliography see Coin hoards, nos. 311,339, 351,418,440,485. The only record of the Sustinenza hoard as it was when recovered is H. Willers, KupferprSgung, 48 (wrongly omitted in Coin hoards, .no. 339); from that record and from inspection of the hoard as at present preserved in Verona it is possible to be reasonably certain of the numbers of quinarii of C. Fundanius, P. Sabinus, T. ClouUus, C. Egnatuleius, L. Piso and M. Cato and of anonymous quinarii; Q. Titius, Cn. Lentulus and L. Dossenus are now represented by 2, 2 and 4 quinarii respectively. Since there are 396 quinarii unaccounted for, I have assigned these to Q. Titius, Cn. Lentulus and L. Dossenus in the same proportions as those in which their quinarii occur in tile other 5 hoards. * Specimens -BMCRR Rome 4016; Haeberlin 2740 = Berlin; Paris, A 11900; Vienna 87850. » Specimens -BMCRR Cyrenaica 7 and 8; Paris, A 13795 and AF; Vatican 3477-8; Rcme, Museo Nazionale; Weber 918. The Table is constructed on the same principles as Table L; in order to estimate the number of obverse dies on the basis of the number of specimens in the 6 selected hoards, I have worked on the following assumption: 81 dies:specimens = (approximately) 1:1 Down to From 50 to 31 dies:specimens = 2:1 I do not regard my estimates for the second period as at all precise.
674
Size of issues of coinage TABLE
Li I. Size of sestertius issues, 91-44 B.C. ;=3
I 337/4 340/3 352/2 449/5 454/4 454/5 455/4 455/5 455/6 463/5 463/6 464/7 464/8 465/8 472/4 473/4 474/7 474/8 480/26 480/27 480/28
D. Silanus L. Piso L. Bursio C. Pansa A. Nerva A. Nerva C. Restio C. Restio C. Restio Mn. Rufus Mn. Rufus T. Carisius T. Carisius C. Paetus L. Celsus Palicanus L. Acisculus L. Acisculus L. Buca P. Macer M. Mettius
41 14* 1 33 7 4s 2
20'
8 11 4 18 6"
3 6
3 9
1
1
3 4
3 5
1
2
6
5
1 2 11
1 2
8 5 13 13 5 2
3
14 8 5-4 15 14 5 4 3
1
1
9M 17'
2
1 2
5
6
2
1
1
1 Prowe 918 = Berlin; Prowe 919 = BM; Vatican 3774; Copenhagen. * See Bf. iii, 30; to the list of pieces of the first type add Prowe 492 = Berlin; Munzen und Medaillen 19,42; Parma (Bf. ii, 27); two pieces in Turin; to the list of pieces of the second type add Haeberlin 1319, from it remove Hague 608 (really a piece of A. Nerva). ' See Bf. iii, 106 (Haeberlin 2714 = MUnzhandlung Basel 3, 96). * Paris,A11837; BMCRR Rome 4003; Milan 1994; Nordheim 238 = Berlin; Turin; Haeberlin 2730; Vienna 40338. 5 Bologna; Hague 608 (very worn and damaged in cleaning) - obverse die used for no. 455/4. • Paris, A F ; A 4149; BMCRR Rome 4034-5; Hannover 3193-4; Berlin; Copenhagen; Haeberlin 2753; Ball 9/2/1932. 848. 7 Paris, A 4150. I BMCRR Rome 4036; Berlin; Haeberlin 2754; Quadras y Ramon 140. • See NC 1974 (forthcoming), 'Five late sestertii'. 10 BMCRR Rome 4076; Paris, A 7112; Berlin; Haeberlin 2785; Borghesi 307 = Sarti 1606. II Paris, A 13438-9; A F ; BMCRR Rome 4028; Hannover 3215; Haeberlin 2745 = Berlin; Prowe 1159 = Berlin; Haeberlin 2746. w See Bf. iii, 69. 19 BMCRR Rome 4117; Bologna; Cuzzi 346 = Hannover 3254a; Depoletti 3323 = Martinetti 1326 = Prowe 1476 = Berlin; Haeberlin 2813; Bonazzi 1190. 11 BMCRR Rome 4163; Hannover 3256; Turin; Haeberlin 2832; Bonazzi 1300; Paris, A 3937; A F ; Vienna 3977; Berlin.
None of these issues occur in hoards as far as I know; the Table therefore attempts to relate numbers of obverse and reverse dies to numbers of specimens known to me.
675
Coinage and finance TABLELIII. Size of didrachm and drachm issues
II
2 13/1 15/1 20/l 22/1 25/1 25/2 26/1 26/2 27/1 28/3 29/3 30/1 31-34/1 42/1 28/4 29/4 30/2 . 1 2 a
37 23 43 82 27 16 18 8 16
u8 58 136 147 74
51
13 o 6
275
373
366
39
—
11
4 10
3 2 22
[18] 3i 4 [9] [6] [9] [3] [6]
8 7 1
80
Listed in 'Monete romano-campane', RIN 1899 and 1900. As presented in the table in NC 1964, 350-1. Coin hoards, nos. 11-12, 33-7, 48, 58-64.
4
15 9 [24] 43 4 [12] [8] [12] [4] [8]
See Table xix.
It is possible to form some estimate of the relative size of the first seven didrachm issues fairly easily, with the help of the check provided by the control-marks on the Roma/Victory ROMANO issue; but the quadrigatus coinage was clearly on a far larger scale than any of the preceding issues of didrachms, and it is not easy to devise any means of relating it to them. For the quadrigatus coinage was a coinage which came to an end in a period of war; it was thus likely to be hoarded and the hoards were likely to be lost as a result of the violent death of their owners. The quadrigatus coinage is now therefore certainly over-represented in hoards and collections, compared to thefirstseven didrachm issues. Apart from this, since the Second Punic War was a period of localised circulation and large-scale hoarding, a single hoard may alter the picture completely; thus Bahrfeldt knew of 21 debased quadrigati, an unpublished hoard from Montedoro contains at least 308 (RIN 1912, 330 n. 4). It would be possible with the expenditure of an immense amount of labour to count the dies used for the different issues of the quadrigatus coinage; but it would not be an enviable task.
676
Size of issues of coinage TABLE LIV. Size of denarius, quinarius and sestertius issues, 211-158 B.C. The Table displays the occurrence of all denarius, quinarius, sestertius, victoriatus and half-victoriatus issues from the inception of the denarius system to 158 in 18 selected hoards. I provide the Table only to draw attention to the difficulties involved in estimating the size of issues in this period and to provide a framework for future work on counting dies. Localised circulation during the Second Punic War makes early hoards unreliable as a guide to size of issues, the Petacciato and Banzi hoards do little more than illustrate the disappearance from circulation of issues based on a weight standard of 72 denarii to the pound. I have therefore taken account of the representation of the issues in question in Paris, London and Hannover.
677
Coinage and finance TABLELIV
3
Iss
I
44/1 44/5 44/6 44/7 45/1
Anon. 1 1
12 . .
1
93 . .
. .
1 . .
28
.
.
.
. 10 68 .
24 . .
.
Anon.
15
45/2
45/3 46/1 47/1 48/1
Anon. Anon. Anon.
50/2 51/1 52/1 53/1 53/2
Anchor
11 2
M Apex Anon.
54/1 55/1 57/1 57/2 58/1
Anon. Anon. Crescent Crescent Comucopiae
58/2 59/1 60/1 61/1 62/1
Comucopiae Apex and hammer Caduceus Victory Rostrum
63/1 64/1 65/1 66/1 67/1
C
68/1 68/2 68/3 70/1 71/1
Corn-ear Corn-ear Com-ear Anon.
•
•
•
•
•
76
l
37
•
35
M A?
Anon. Anon.
C/M
21
45 5
678
• 4
• .
7 2
• .
8 2
Size of issues of coinage
1
I
II
Q 69
62
34 6
4 1
383
[2oo]
2O 71 1
[lOO] [1OO] [lOO]
15 4 4
[
—
130
238
79
2 1 #
16
11
11
•
42 27
655 50
10
[400] [100]
3
3 [<10]
2
2
4 8
42
[
12 1
[60] [20]
8 3 3 2
[60] [20] [20] [20]
4
31
[<1O] [20]
1
3
1 2 2
[20] [20] 1
10
6 1
6 9
12 2
10
5
101
36
[60] [40]
For bibliography see Coin hoards, nos. 72, 82-4, 86, 102-3, 106-9, 112-13, 124, 149, 157, 162; for the Taranto 1970 hoard of denarii and quinarii see the publication of C. A. Hersh, NC 1972, 75; unfortunately, Hersh underestimates the complexity of the coinage of the period covered by the hoard - the figures in the Table are based on his publication and on my own inspection of originals or photographs comprising the bulk of the hoard, and should be regarded as definitive.
679
Coinage and finance TABLE
Liv (cont.) t*"* O\
iber
00 00
§ Z
s
CO
72/1 72/3 72/4 73/i 73/2
Corn-ear Corn-ear Corn-ear Doldbella Dolabella
74/1 74/2 75/1 76/1 77/1
C-V5L C-V5L C-fil
78/1 80/1 83/1 83/2
Staff Wheel Dolphin Spearhead Spearhead
83/3
Spearhead
84/1 84/2
R£ RR R& H
79/1
84/3 85/1
Branch Corn-ear a
86A/1 88/2 89/1 89/2 90/1
Q
90/2 9i/i 92/1
Anon. Torque CROT
93/1 94/1
M
1
Spearhead Club Club Anon.
11
M \B
95/1 95/2 96/1 97/1 97/2
Anon.
98/1 98/2
U/T U/T
98/3
12
13 6
I I
13
111
680
O O O
„ A ^
I oo
I U>
O
•
I
O •
I
M
O O O O O
I I ^ ^ A A^
•
OOOOOUi
^A A
C\
, ^ A O O O O
m r
01 o * • •>
^ A A A A O O O O O
I I A_ ^ _ _ ^ O O O O O
I I A„ „ A O O O > * O
Utt
A A A _ _ O O O O O
II
Number of obverse dies
Total
Masera1
Banzi
Petacciato
Mirabella
Caltrano Vic.
San Angelo
Valera
Tarquinia
Drieves
Orzivecchi
Paestum
g
Coinage and finance TABLE LIV (COM.)
98/4 98B/1 101/1 101/2 102/1 102/2
U/T
Q Q
1 .
M M
103/1 103/2 104/1 105/1 105/2
Pentagram Pentagram
106/1 106/2 107/1 108/1 109/1
Staff Staff C Caduceus Knife
110/1 111/1 112/1 112/2 113/1
Wreath
114/1 115/1 116/ia 116/ib 117A/1
Rostrum Trident Bulll. Bullr. Rudder
119/1 119/2 120/1 120/2 121/1
Thunderbolt Thunderbolt Knife Knife Sow
121/2 122/1 122/2 123/1 124/1
Sow Dog Dog Ram Meta
2
. .
1 36 29
B
A,
Staff Staff Star
682
•
•» •
vl
4^
| U | H
.".'A'^r-," N •* (0 U> •» ooooo
I
N f^.
oo^oo
U) f
> r_7T_ A'^,
I I I * ~J | U> I M-
W
• » • • * .
A
• fcj •
N •
( J J . M . .
•
Ill
•
• . . . • - • *
•
N
I I W - U 00
U) * . 00
»
>
.
.
•
00 •
•
•
•
» * » » I) t J U N f
•* M U) •
•
•
* • • •
^-^T^^ „"„"„ M W UIU A f ^ > ' ) l o o oo ooo^o
A
to •
•*
| »(J» »• I
A" ^ _ •» ^ M N £,£,£,£.'*'
f
. . . » » .
I
.
.
.
»
•
.
»
.
.
A •» •» ** £ •» o*
U I ( J J I M I O K )
N
|
.
•
.
.
^
fci
.
.
•
.
W H
•
.
.
.
*• •» u> UJ
> * | | O\U> I I
.
.
.
.
.
.
•
.
1
Total
Masera
Banzi
Petacciato
Mirabella
Caltrano Vic.
San Angelo
A A Number of • » •* Q ^Q^ obverse dies
I •» I
.
.
•
.
Valera
Tarquinia
Drieves
Orzivecchi
Paestum
JP
Coinage and finance TABLE LIV (COM.)
Is sU
I00
i" I
Ia)
"2S
E a
I« g
i S
8
a a
gS [5
jg
124/2 125/1 126/1
Afeta QLC \JSL
. .
. .
. .
.
" .
' .
" .
127/1 128/1
Head Shield and carnyx
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
129/1 130/1 131/1 132/1 132/2
Pentagram Staff and feather Staff and wing Nk,
. . . .
. . . .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
.
133/1 133/2 134/1 135/1 136/1
™ M W? Owl A/
137/1 138/1 139/1 140/1 141/1
Crescent P-M; Anon. Anon. TOD
146/1 147/1 152/1 153/1 154/1
A? CN-DO SX-Q CN-CA> U-COIU
155/1 156/1 157/1 158/1 159/1
V Prawn Cornucopiae Anon. Fly
159/2 161/1 162/1 162/2 163/1
Fly A/ M M Feather
164/1 165/1 166/1
Anon. Anchor Anon.
684
'
. .
.
. .
. .
oo
_
tjj OU> O
•»
•»
NUi
•
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
>•
•»
KJ K) t-^ W t-k
^^A^A
UiU
OJ
O
• * <JJ
(jj O\ <JJ M OJ
^^^A_
U I U
O
O
O
til M |>) IA
O
A_^_A K O
O
O
O
O
O
U<> OJ
**
_,„_„„
h^ UJ
OJ S) ^
h*
m
(0
O
O
O
O
^ , ^
(J
K) U UJ N> 4^ O
_ ^
•*
A_ A_ _ M- OJ H* ^ . O O O O O
to
tJ •*
M O
O
O
O
N K> M
I Ul
A _,„_
»U
^ O
A
I
Number of obverse dies
Total
Masera1
Banzi
Petacciato
Mirabella
Caltrano Vic.
San Angelo
Valera
Tarquinia
Drieves
Orzivecchi
Paestum
3"
I
Coinage and finance TABLE LIV (cmt.)
R ox
I
..
167/1 168/1
Anon. Helmet
168/2 169/1 170/1 171/1 172/1
Helmet GR Ear D M
182/1 187/1
Gryphon TV R
I
?
§
1 I
686
I I I I
oo 4
00
00'O\ .O..O.
\O
I
I Ultl
M M "N"«J "W' .O, .O..O..O..O,
U
(O 00 O O
1
Number of obverse dies
Total
Masera
Banzi
Petacciato
Mirabella
Caltrano Vic.
San Angelo
Valera
Tarquinia
Drieves
Orzivecchi
Paestum
f
8'
Coinage and finance TABLE LV. Size of late gold issues
•°
359/1 L. Sulla 367/2 L.Sulla 367/4 L. Sulla 375/i Q 381/1 A. Manlius 402/1 Magnus 452/1 Caesar 456/1 Caesar 460/1 Q. Scipio 466/1 A. Hirtius 475/1 L. Plancus 475/2 L. Plancus 481/1 Caesar 490/2 Octavian 491/1 L. Cestius, etc. 491/2 L. Cestius, etc. 492/1 M. Antonius 492/2 M. Antonius 493/1 Octavian 494/1-15 L. Regulus, etc. 494/20 P. Clodius 494/22 P. Clodius 494/26 L. Regulus 494/34 C.Varus 494/35 C.Varus 494/44 L. Longus 494/45 L. Longus 494/46 L. Longus 1 2
a
°I
| a
^ S3
91 72 25'
6 5 12 1 7 4
94 135
1 * 2 4 3
1 143 78 12 31 35 43 35 861 5'/ 14 1148 37
1 [100] [50] [ < 10] [20] [25] [30] [25] [
1 6" 59 7 1210 1010 410
1 3 I40] [
° ••§ e
6 5 13 1 3 2 3 1 1 [100] [50] [ < 10] [20] [25] [30] [25] (2 \i [
Bahrfeldt's list, less Pembroke and Modena pieces (Montagu piece = Ars Classica xviii, 3 = ANS); with Hess 7/3/1935, 29; Munzen und Medaillen 43, 116; HSA piece in ANS is false. Bahrfeldt's list, less Pembroke piece; with Glasgow piece (wrongly placed by Bahrfeldt as his no. 13, 20); two pieces in Turin (one illustrated in A. S. Fava etc., // medagliere, pi. 15, 9); Santamaria 24/1/38, 201.
' Bahrfeldt's list, less Glasgow piece (see n. 2 above), Borghesi and Florence pieces, one Brussels piece, one Paris piece; with Riccio piece; Quadras y Ramon 391; Butler 288; Haeberlin 1626; Bonazzi 841 = Hall 536; Ars Classica xviii, 4; Hess-Leu iii, 342 = BM; Hess-Leu xvii, 1. 1 Bahrfeldt's list, less his fourth and ninth pieces; with Nordheim 193 = Hess 7/3/1935, 31 = Ryan 1568 and Hess-Leu xxii, 131. s Bahrfeldt's list, with three pieces from the Tesoro di Via Alessandria in the Capitol and one piece recently on London market. • Bahrfeldt's list, with Hess-Leu xxii, 138. ' Bahrfeldt's list, with Hall 661. 8 Buttrey's list, with the trial piece of L. Regulus (p. 581). • Bahrfeldt's list (Parodi 635 = O'Hagan 133a = Ars Classica viii, 142). 10 The piece in the Hague weighing 8.08 gr. is in fact Bahrfeldt's no. 34; the piece in Berlin weighing 8.01 gr. is in fact Bahrfeldt's no. 33a; the piece in the Hague weighing 7.92 gr. is in fact Bahrfeldt's no. 35a - the reverse illustrated as being of this coin belongs to the other Hague coin.
688
Size of issues of coinage
Z 495/1 497/1 498/1 499/1 500/2 500/4 500/6 502/1 505/1 505/4 506/1 507/1 508/1 509/1 509/3 5H/1 512/1 513/1 5H/1 515/1 516/1 516/4 517/1 517/4 517/7 519/1 521/1 522/1 522/3 524/1 525/1 526/1 526/3 527/1 528/1 529/1 533/1 533/3 534/1
u
Issu
nber
m
1% 40 §
M. Lepidus Octavian C. Cassius C. Cassius C. Cassius C. Cassius C. Cassius Brutus C. Cassius C. Cassius Brutus Brutus Brutus Q. Cornuficius Q. Cornuficius Sex. Pompeius C. Vestalis M. Secundus C. Vaala L. Rufus M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius Cn. Ahenobarbus M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius Q. Labienus Ti. Graccus Q. Vitulus Q. Vitulus M. Antonius M. Antonius Octavian M. Antonius M. Antonius Octavian
1
II 1
5
[
3 30 27 7 8
[20] [20] [
9 10
6 17
13
3 2 l"
24 18 9 15 5 15 19 20"
513 1
9 3" 2 1
4" 7 7 6 1
4 20 1
11
mbenof ersedies
TABLE LV {cont.)
2
1 1 1
[15] [10] [
[
i 1
[
[20] [20] I ^ iol 1 ^ lOl
2 2 1
[15] [10] [
[
?1 1 2
[
[
1
3 [
[
1
1
6
5
3
11"
1
1
Piece in Zagreb. Not including an erroneous second listing of the Jameson piece by Bahrfeldt. " Not including the Naples piece, otherwise Bahrfeldt's list, with the pieces listed on p. 525 n. 1. 14 The Ponton D'Amecourt, Strozzi and Evans pieces are all false. " Bahrfeldt's list, with Munzen und Medaillen 43, 242. " Bahrfeldt's list, assuming that the Pembroke piece is not the same as the Berlin piece. 13
689
Coinage and finance TABLE LV
(amt.)
I 540/1 541/1 541/2 544/1-7 546/5 17 18
Octavian M. Antonius M. Antonius M. Antonius Scarpus
4
[
11" 1018
1 3 5-7
1
1
[
Bahrfeldt's list (Vierordt 544 - Turin), less Trivulzio piece; with Clarke piece (now in BM), Fox piece (cast in BM) and Munzen und Medaillen 25, 586 = 52, 507. Bahrfeldt's list, with those aurei which represent new types since his day.
Attempts to estimate the number of dies used for Sullan and post-Sullan gold issues are unlikely to be wholly successful; the number of dies attested for small issues can be discovered fairly easily (though wide variations are possible in the relationship between specimens known and number of dies; compare for instance nos. 534/1 and 541/2); but there seems little hope of establishing it for the three really large issues, those of A. Hirtius, L. Plancus and L. Cestius with C. Norbanus. The Brescello hoard of some 80,000 aurei, in which these issues doubtless bulked large, was for the most part melted down and what we now have of these issues may be very unrepresentative. The Table attempts to relate numbers of specimens known (from Bahrfeldt unless otherwise stated) to numbers of obverse and reverse dies.
690
Size of issues of coinage TABLE LVI. Size of early gold issues
1 z
28/1 29/1 28/2 29/2 44/2 44/3 44/4 50/1 72/2 88/1 105/2 106/2 548/1 549/1
I
4> O
(A 0}
umber 0 verse di
«* 8
z-g
Anon. \ Anon./ Anon.\ Anon./ Anon. Anon. Anon. Anchor Corn-ear Spearhead Pentagram Staff T. Quinctius Cn. Lentulus
24
17
"s 8
11 17
11
11
59s
27
26
381
6
5
14
15
154
4 4
3 4
1 2
1 1
1 1
35 5'
?2
?2
5
3
2
1
1
16 l
10
203
1
This figure represents the number of pieces available to me in my own photographs and those from sale catalogues; the numbers of dies are those represented in this sample. Bahrfeldt's list, assuming that Borghesi piece = Valton piece and Kircher piece = Merzbacher 15/11/1910, 964 (= Ars Classica xii, 93). * Bahrfeldt's list, with Naples 118749, a piece each in Turin and Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, also Bonazzi 89; Browne 60; Munzen und Medaillen 13, 527; Glendining 7/7/1971, 146. 4 Bahrfeldt's list, with Leningrad and Glasgow and Copenhagen pieces wrongly listed by Bahrfeldt as his no. 13a, 5 and 20 and 23; also Hirsch vii, 487; xxvi, 166; Tolstoi 70, all wrongly listed by Bahrfeldt as illustrations of his no. 13a;finallythe piece from Morgantina (see p. 34), a piece in Turin and Munzen und Medaillen 2, 517. 1 The Montagu piece has not re-appeared anywhere and is not illustrated in the sale catalogue. ' See R. A. G. Carson, BMQ 1955,11.
2
There is little reason to suppose that either the Oath-scene gold or the Mars/Eagle gold ever entered normal circulation; the former, although it belonged to a type of coinage system in which gold was not an unprecedented ingredient, was only struck when the system was about to be superseded; the latter was struck for only a brief period at the beginning of a new coinage system. But although hoards of both gold issues must presumably have been found at some stage, the only finds of which we have explicit evidence are isolated finds: One Oath-scene stater-Sainte-Croix, Switzerland, SNR 1910, 297. One sixty-as Mars/Eagle piece - Montone del Grano, now in Museo Nazionale di Ancona. One sixty-as Mars/Eagle piece -Melito Irpino, NSc 1881, 327. One sixty-as Mars/Eagle piece -Magione, Stud. Etr. 1940, 324. One twenty-as Mars/Eagle piece-Morgantina, AJA 1957, 158. One sixty-as and one twenty-as Mars/Eagle piece - Labico, F. Ficoroni, Memorie di Labico, 86. We are thus on very uncertain ground in arguing that the specimens of each issue which now survive bear any consistent relation to the number originally struck. The Table attempts to relate numbers of specimens known (from Bahrfeldt unless otherwise stated) to numbers of obverse and reverse dies.
691
Coinage and finance TABLE LVII.
I
Size of bronze issues of denarius coinage
I
81/1 97/22b 98A/5 116/2 123/2 147/4 151/1 160/5 172/3 187/7 199/6 210/7 211/1 226/2 231/2 231/3 234/2 249/4 263/2 271/2 279/2 289/5 293/3 305/2 344/5D-C 344/7 354/2
Cn. Cornelius U U/T Bull Ram Cn. Domitius S. Furius Dolphin M PVR Saranus C. Iunius Q. Metellus C. Titinius C. Renius C. Renius Ti. Veturius P. Maenius M. Metellus Mn. Acilius Carbo M. Cipius L. Philippus Q. Cerco L. Sabinus L. Sabinus C. Macer
1
L
l!
1!
II
aS
zl
I£
2
0
3
0
2 2 3
1 1 1
2
1 3 2
91
0 0 3
3 2 112 23
0 4 1 2 2
2* 3
1 1 2 1
0 1 3
2
2 o
25
7 3
2 0 o
1
2 2 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 ?2 ?2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 or 3 2 2 2 ?i ?i 2 4 2 1 2 2
1
See Bf. iii, 99. See p. 557 (I here ignore the Gotha piece, which I have not seen). 5 See Bf. iii, 70. * See Bf. iii, 81. ' See Bf. iii, 68 (the Hannover piece is altered in modern times).
2
I have indicated (p. 123) why I have been reluctant to attempt any estimate of the numbers of dies used for issues of bronze coinage; this Table presents numbers of specimens known and numbers of obverse and reverse dies for a few small issues. If the evidence of the Table has any validity, we may perhaps believe that an issue represented in Paris by 23 specimens is the product of rather less than twice that number of obverse dies. The numbers of specimens known are listed in the appropriate place in the Catalogue, except where indicated in one of the footnotes above. There are of course a large number of bronze issues which are as far as I know unique: nos. 69/1, 82/1, 99/10,106/9 and 10,123/3, *47/3> 172/2.i75/»> 205/6, 228/2, 240/5 and 6, 242/5, 244/4 and 5, 249/2, 250/3, 255/5, 264/3, 266/4, 269/3, 289/3 and 4, 292/3, 308/5, 316/2, 344/6, 348/7. For estimates of dies for bronze issues see also the article by Bahrfeldt cited for no. 350B.
692
Size of issues of coinage by being buried or melted down, presumably in large blocks; but out of some 500 Republican silver hoards not one consists of a large block of a single issue; obviously it is now impossible to know if a block of coinage was melted down in antiquity, but I do not regard it as likely for a large, homogeneous group of Republican denarii or quinarii to have suffered in this way. Nor does it seem likely to me that in the normal course of events in the Republican mint dies were cut, but not used; some dies were used beyond the point at which they were really usable (see p. 583) and other dies were re-cut (see p. 578). We should therefore reckon that in most issues, certainly in all issues of any size, about 10% of the dies originally cut broke when used; certainly it would be both inherently surprising if all dies wereflawlessand contrary to the experience of other periods.1 It follows that die number of dies on which calculations must be based in considering the size of an issue is the number from which specimens now survive, not the theoretical maximum number cut. B. Other struck issues The method adopted to estimate the number of dies used to strike the denarius and quinarius issues of the Republic from c. 157 onwards may be applied to any other group of struck issues; Tables LII-LVII therefore show for each issue in the various groups die number of specimens in die sample adopted (selected hoard specimens or all known specimens) and the number of dies used (counted or estimated).2 C. Cast issues We are entirely widiout information on how many times a mould might be used (diey certainly were re-used, even repaired, see pp. 553 and 589), and diere dierefore seems little point in attempting an estimate of die numbers used for different issues; in any case die state of preservation of much surviving aes grave does not encourage die belief that an accurate estimate could be made. There is a reasonable correlation between the indications of the relative size of different issues derived from a count of all known specimens and the indications derived from a count of selected hoard specimens. Beyond this it does not seem possible to go. 1 1
Verbal information from P. Grierson on English mint records. For broken dies see IG ii-iiia, 1469, 107-8; 1471, 56-7. For variations in the product of individual dies see above, p. 641 n. 1. I have little to say about the various formulae for calculating the total number of dies used for an issue on the basis of the number of dies represented in a given sample, except that their reliability depends on the adequacy of the sample. The estimated figures for reverse dies for the cistophoric coinage of Augustus produced by C. H. V. Sutherland, Cistophori, 106-8, do no more than illustrate the dangers of extrapolating from inadequate evidence; the formula of C. S. S. Lyon (NCirc 1965,179) is clearly unreliable when the number of coins per die in a sample is less than two (see M. H. Crawford in A. D. Momigliano (ed.), Sources of ancient history, forthcoming). For the relationship between the number of obverse dies and the number of reverse dies normal through the Republic and the Triumviral period, see p. 672.
693
Coinage and finance Absolute size of issues There are two issues or groups of issues of the Roman Republican coinage where we have some idea of the amount of bullion used, part of the Mars/Eagle gold coinage and the denarii of C. Annius (no. 366).x For the three issues of 3-scruple, 60-as pieces of gold with the symbols staff, pentagram and spearhead (nos. 105/2, 106/2 and 88/1) some 1,000 pounds of gold at least were used;2 from this 96,000 gold pieces (or more) could be struck. Since 4 obverse dies were apparently used, each die struck on average at least c. 24,000 pieces.3 The issue of C. Annius was presumably used to pay the two legions (at least) which he commanded for at least a year;4 their cost may be regarded as over 3,000,000 denarii, in this period.6 Since C. Annius used over 100 obverse dies, each die struck on average about 30,000 pieces. The figures for both the issues under discussion are, particularly for the second issue, higher than comparablefiguresfor the Greek world ;6 but the Republican coinage, notably the denarius coinage, was struck in considerably lower relief than most Greek coinage and with less attention to technical perfection (see p. 583); it is reasonable to suppose that dies lasted much longer. Ill
INCOME AND EXPENDITURE
Table LVIII below and accompanying commentary present a picture of the income, expenditure and volume of coinage of the Roman Republic from 157 to 50.7 In converting estimates of dies used for each issue to estimates of numbers of specimens struck, I adopt die figure of 30,000 pieces per obverse die calculated for die issue of C. Annius. Using this figure, there is a remarkable correlation between expenditure and volume of coinage. No reasonable figure for pieces per obverse die8 can reduce the volume of coinage produced by the Republic down to Sulla to a level at which it can be regarded as struck merely to pay out what was not available in old coin in die aerariwn. I therefore believe the figure of 30,000 pieces per obverse die to be the most likely for the coinage of the Republic and this coinage as struck down to Sulla not only to pay the expenses of the state, but to pay diem in new coin every year.9 1
The theory of A. Alfoldi, that no. 491 was struck to pay the three legions deployed to defend Rome against Octavian in 43, is unfortunately unlikely to be correct (see commentary on no. 491 and p. 95). 1 See p. 34 n. 4. > Calculations throughout are based on obverse dies, which had a longer life, see p. 672. 4 P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 470-1. C. Annius began to strike in 82, see p. 80. * For the cost at different times see pp. 696-7. * 5,000-8,000 for cold striking, 10,000-16,000 for hot striking, D. G. Sellwood, NC 1963, 229-30; 7,350-39,900, E. J. P. Raven, NC 1950, 13, expressing a preference for a figure some way below the theoretical maximum; about 13,000, E. S. G. Robinson, MusN i960, 1-15 (I guess that half the available gold (at least 104,000 drachmae, W. E. Thompson, NC 1970, 6 n. 1) was used for striking staters, i.e. 26,000 staters were produced; two obverse dies are now attested). ' For the impossibility of doing this for any earlier or later period see pp. 676-7 and p. 639. ' For the range of possibilities see above, n. 6; the arbitrary calculations of L. Brunetti are refuted by D. G. Sellwood, I.e. * For other evidence for this view see pp. 617-18.
694
Income and expenditure By way of conclusion, I return to the problem of embezzlement; from 62 onwards Rome had revenues in theory worth 135,000,000 denarii a year (Plutarch, Pomp. 45); ofthis, the corn-dole after the law of P. Clodius took nearly 27,000,000 denarii (Cicero, Sest. 55), the army at most 36,000,000 denarii (24 legions each costing 1,500,000 denarii), making a total of 63,000,000 denarii. What happened to the rest? I have suggested that complaints of actual shortage of money in the 50s are to be taken with a pinch of salt (pp. 638-9); but it is difficult to believe that these complaints would have been made if there was really an annual surplus of income over regular expenditure of 70,000,000 denarii or so and equally difficult to reconcile the financial difficulties of both Pompey and Caesar from 49 onwards with the presence of up to 910,000,000 denarii in the treasury by 50; it is also worth remarking that the pay of the troops in Cilicia in 51 was in arrears (Cicero, ad An. v, 14, i;fam. xv, 4,2). There seem to be two possibilities, which are not mutually exclusive; the governing class, in addition to the pickings available to administrators out of a sum of 1,500,000 denarii allowed by the treasury for a legion for a year, perhaps collected further sums by way of additional expense allowances or by simply helping themselves;1 and publicani perhaps paid over only part of the notional revenue of a province for whose taxation they were responsible. 1
On this see now E. Badian, Publicans and sinners, 108-9.
695
TABLE LVIII. Coinage and expenditure from 157 to SO B.C.
I have presented this table exactly as it emerges from the combination of three sets of data - the dates of the various issues as presented in the Introduction and Catalogue, the sizes of the various issues as evidenced by Tables L, LI and LV and the numbers of the legions in the field each year as worked out by P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 432-3, 435-45 and 449. Where the results in the table suggest that any of these data need correction, I draw attention to the problem in the commentary on the table. In calculating die absolute size of an issue I have assumed that an obverse die struck on average 30,000 coins, whether denarii, quinarii or aurei; I have ignored bronze coinage throughout, since even a large issue of asses (each worth a tenth or a sixteenth of a denarius) will not significandy affect the overall picture; I have also ignored silver sestertii. The evidence for the annual cost of a legion differs for the third and first centuries B.C. In 210 Scipio took widi him to Spain 400 talents, that is 2,400,000 denarii, perhaps a year's pay for die four legions in Spain; 1 this suggests a figure of 600,000 denarii for die annual cost of a legion, close to die figure obtained by a calculation based on individual rates of pay (4,140 legionaries @ 108 denarii2 = 447,120 60 centurions @ 216 denarii = 12,960 200 cavalry @ 324 denarii = 64,800 524,880) First-century evidence suggests, however, diat die annual cost of a legion was 1,500,000 denarii before die rise in pay under Caesar; Pompeius was audiorised to raise 24 legions (120,000 men) in 67 and was allotted 36,000,000 denarii;3 Piso was allotted 4,500,000 denarii as governor of Macedonia (Cicero, in Pis. 86), presumably for die year 57, and perhaps had diree legions;4 Ahenobarbus in 49 had 1,500,000 denarii (Caesar, BC i, 23,4) and one legion somewhat under strengdi (Appian, BC ii, 129).5 1
Polybius x, 19, 2 for the amount; Livy xxvii, 36, 12 and P. A. Brunt, Manpower, 418 {contra T. Frank, ESAR i, 77 n. 13) for the number of legions; Brunt, Manpower, 671 for the size of a legion. * 360 days @ 3 asses a day (see p. 624) = 1,080 asses = 108 denarii. ' Brunt, 456-7. * Brunt, 469. * The evidence I have cited in the text is at first sight incompatible with that which emerges from a consideration of Pompeius' position in 54-50; I interpret this as follows. Pompeius took over 4 legions in Spain as a result of the Lex Trebonia of 55 (Plutarch, Pomp. 52); in 52 he was voted either two more legions or the funds for two more legions, depending on the view one takes of Appian, BC ii, 92, and 6,000,000 denarii per year (Plutarch, Pomp. 55; Cats. 28); by 49 Spain had 6 regular legions and 1 legio vernacula; in my view the state paid for two legicns down to 52 and four legions thereafter, Pompeius paid for the additional legions.
TABLE LVIII (cont.)
All this evidence is confirmed by information which dates from after the doubling of pay under Caesar; D. Brutus started off in 44 with two legions, raised two more late in 44 and acquired three of Pansa's after the relief of Mutina;6 he presumably used only his own money to pay for them (see p. 640 for the emptiness of the aerarium in this period) and had spent therefore 10,000,000 denarii from April 44 to May 43 (Cicero, Jam. xi, 10, 5); if he is held to have had the equivalent of three legions for a full year, he will have been spending at the rate of 3,000,000 denarii per legion per year. The enormous rise in the cost of a legion between the third and first centuries is doubtless to be explained by the supposition that in the latter period the amount allowed covered generous provision for an inflated corps of generals' aides;7 the evidence of the coinage indicates that the change occurred at the time of C. Gracchus and I conjecture that it formed part of his legislation;8 I have in any case assumed in calculating the annual cost of the army that a legion cost 600,000 denarii per year down to 124 and 1,500,000 denarii from 123. It may at first sight seem misleading to record in the table only the annual cost of the army; but this was in my view die only major annual expenditure. Of the other items listed by T. Frank,9 none are to be regarded as significant and one should not figure at all, food for allied troops.10 The only navy of any size Rome had down to 80 was that of Sulla11 and that was not paid for by the central government; replacement arms were paid for by the soldier who needed them (Polybius vi, 39, 15) and I do not suppose that the cost of equipping those troops newly raised each year was very great; transport when needed was doubtless usually requisitioned. We have no way of estimating the costs of the central administration; I dierefore ignore them. As for the provision of subsidised corn, if the Sicilian tithe was used, this would hardly affect expenditure in cash. Finally, it is worth repeating diat in addition to the coinage produced by the Roman Republic and figuring in this table, diere was a substantial denarius coinage produced in Spain and a cistophorus coinage produced in Asia, both in my view serving die fiscal ends of die state.12 • Brunt, 479. 7 It is notorious that at the end of Cicero's term as governor of Cilicia his staff regarded themselves as entitled to share out arrong themselves money allotted to him and remaining unspent; see also Cicero, in Verr.' i, 36; ad Ait. vi, 3, 6. ' An attempt to prevent extortion from provincials by allowing governors and their staff generous perquisites seems to me an intelligible pan of C. Gracchus' programme. Little expense will have been caused by his measure to provide clothing (nothing else is attested) free to soldiers (Plutarch, C. Gr. 5; cf. Diod. xxxv, 25; Asconius 68C provides no evidence for when the measure was repealed). • ESAR i, 228. 10 Polybius vi, 39, 15 does not say Rorr.e paid for it, only that individual allied soldiers did not; presumably their communities did and paid them less than Roman soldiers. 11 Plutarch, Luc. 2; Appian, Mith. 131 and 226. " For the former see JVC 1969, 79-84.
TABLE LVIII [com.)
3°
Coinage 1 in
1 1 1 1
Expenditure
20
10
157
155
150
145 Years
140
»35
I have started this table in 157 B.C., because that is the year in which, on the chronology adopted in this book, there begins an almost unbroken run of denarius coinage which lasts till the end of the Roman Republic; confirmation for the date in question seems to me to be provided by the fact that 157 is one of the three years for which Pliny provides information on the amount of money in the aerarium. The commentary on the table is organised under particular years or groups of years, but I should at this point remark that I attribute no major expenditure to the Censors of 154 (who were prevented from building a theatre) and of 147,102 and 89 (who held office in time of war). 150-145. The volume of coinageriseswith the recruitment of troops for the war against Carthage (the four African legions are omitted from the table in Brunt, Manpower, 432-3) and the lack of correlation in 147-145 is more apparent than real; both Metellus in Macedonia and Sdpio in Africa had completed their military activities by early in 146 and their troops would not have been paid for more than a part of the year. 144-139. The exiguous issues of these years bear no relation to the volume of expenditure; I believe that contrary to normal practice they were deliberately restricted. I have argued (p. 625) that the denarius was retariffed at 16 instead of 10 asses in 141 because its increasing preponderance in circulation led to its being overvalued in relation to the as; a restriction of issues of new denarii looks like an attempt first to avoid the need to retariff, then to allow the new system to get started without threatening its stability. 138-136.1 have no convincing explanation to offer of the enormous surplus of coinage over estimated army expenditure in these years, but am tempted to suggest that the Aqua Marcia was only nowfinishedand paid for; neither Frontinus, de aq. i, 7, nor the Oxyrrhyncus Epitome of Livy prove that the work was finished in 140. 135-126. Volume of coinage runs consistently close to or somewhat above estimated army expenditure, except in 135; I suggest that contingentsfightingin Illyria and Sicily in 135 were not paid till 134. The two rises in volume of coinage in 132 and 130 may be explained by the beginning of the work of the agrarian commission of Ti. Gracchus and by the censorship of Q. Metellus Macedonicus and Q. Pompeius. (I can see no justification for the view of Brunt, Manpower, 427 that two extra legions fought in Illyria (wrongly Transalpina on p. 432) in 135; army expenditure for 135 is thus 1,000,000 denarii lower than the table indicates.)
s:
8
i±
i±
-j-H-i- 444-
-!•+-
-H tiff
TTJ
tit —141- - H ~ .,^4;
1 s
tr
±1
tt
+T
:t±
tu
U.
i
fi
:±t
Amounts of denarii (in millions) 700
±h±
4+ 44
-K-M
,-H
tt
125-124- The volume of coinage in these years is doubtless to be explained by the construction of the Aqua Tepula. 123-119. Volume of coinage and estimated army expenditure again run parallel, except in 123 and 119, where the extra coinage is doubtless to be explained by the tribunate of C. Gracchus and the censorship of Q. Metellus Balearicus and L. Piso Frugi. I have not included the issues of A. Manlius Q.f. Ser. and Cn. Cornelius L.f. Sisena in the table, since their date is uncertain and the volume of coinage they produced was quite insignificant. I have assigned them a date of 118 in order to assign a precise year rather than one year out of two to nos. 283-308. 118-111. Volume of coinage and estimated army expenditure on the whole run parallel, with a tendency for the former to be somewhat smaller than the latter; my estimates for the sizes of the issues concerned may be too low. The extra coinage in 115 and 114 is doubtless to be explained by the censorship of L. Metellus Diadematus and Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus. ^j 2
110-108. On the chronology adopted in this book there is no explanation for the enormous issues of n o ; they are perhaps to be exchanged with those of 109. The latter will then cover the normal expenditure of 110, the former will cover the building of the Via Aemilia in 109 (T. P. Wiseman, PBSR 1970,140-44, oddly mis-dating to 107). The extra coinage in 108 will cover the costs of the censorship of Q. Fabius Maximus Ebumus and C. Licinius Getha.
I ea -t-t-
8;
8 Amounts of denarii (in millions)
702
-H-
BEE
-•44.
rh:
i+tt
„ *~ . , ' ' T j
a
tit
1O7-1OO. Volume of coinage and estimated army expenditure run parallel; there is a serious shortfall of coinage in 102, which I am unable to explain; as for 101, if the troops who fought in 101 at Vercellae were discharged immediately after the battle :army expenditure for this year would have been less than estimated in the table; the extra coinage in ico is doubtless to be explained by the expenses stemming from the legislation of Saturninus (part of the coinage is a special issue adfrumentum emundum, see p. 73). 99-92. There is a dearth of coinage in the 90s; for 99-97 we have three issues of quinarii, to pay for the settlement of Marius' veterans in Cisalpina (see pp. 629-30), thereafter only three issues of denarii to coverfiveyears; I take it that for this period normal pre-Sullan practice was abandoned and that coin was only struck when needed to make up stocks of old coin. It may be tentatively suggested that striking took place in 97-96 and 92 in connection with the censuses of 97 and 92 (for 97 I have indicated the issues of C. Egnatuleius and L. Pomponius Molo separately not cumulatively in the table). 91-89. From 6 legions in 91 the Roman army rose to 32 in 89 (30 in Italy, Brunt, Manpower, 438, one in Spain, ibid. 664 for the legion of Vatia, one in Macedonia, ibid., 435); but there is no way of estimating with any precision how many men had to be paid in each of the two years 90 and 89 and it is also clear that in late 91 and 90 the mint simply turned out coinage as fast as it could in order to prepare for the emergency; it is, however, clear that the coinage struck in 91-89, including the 76,000,000 denarii (or slightly less; I suspect my estimate of the size of the issue of C. Vibius Pansa to be on the high side) struck in 90, will have been more than adequate. 88. The volume of coinage is somewhat above the estimated expenditure for 17 legions (15 in Italy, Brunt, Manpower, 440, two overseas).
o **•
87. I have entered in the table only the coinage struck by L. Rubrius Dossenus for the legitimate government (see p. 78) and the estimated expenditure on the army loyal to that government (12 legions in Italy, Brunt, Manpower, 440, presumably still one legion in Spain and one in Macedonia); the shortfall of coinage may be readily explained by the supposition that since the central government was desperately short of money and did not receive potential revenues in the hands of Cn. Pompeius Strabo (see p. 637), it did not pay his troops. Cinna's troops were doubtless paid by the issue of L. and C. Memmii (4,000,000 denarii) and by the issues of 86. 86. Brunt, Manpower, 441, estimates only 10 legions altogether for 86, at any rate by the end of the year; of these, five were Sulla's and were not paid for by the central government. (The Macedonian legion had been eliminated in 87.) The surplus of coinage over army expenditure for 86 will have been spent on rewarding the troops who fought for Cinna in 87 (see above) and perhaps on the censorship of L. Marcius Philippus and M. Perperna. 85-81. No meaningful estimate is possible of the number of legions who had to be paid each year; in the table I have placed the issue of Q. Antonius Balbus in 83, the earlier of the two years to which it may in theory belong, since this year is otherwise rather short of coinage. The 558,854 denarii allotted to Verres in 84 clearly form only a small part of the coinage struck in these years. I have included in the table none of the Sullan military issues, nor have I included the anonymous issue of quinarii, no. 373/1, which I regard as struck in 81 for an unidentified Marian remnant. The issue of C. Valerius Flaccus was perhaps struck primarily in order to distribute booty to his soldiers; for the issue of C. Annius see p. 694 above.
u l-l ca
Amounts of denarii (in millions) 704
80 onwards. There were 13 legions in the field in 80, thereafter never less than 15 and rarely less than 20; it is clear that from 80 onwards coin was only struck when needed to make up stocks of old coin, instead of being struck up to the full amount needed to make the state payments for each year; the change in practice is presumably due to Sulla. 79. The rise in the volume of coinage is doubtless to be connected with the raising of two extra legions for Spain. Money was perhaps also assigned for the reconstruction of the Capitoline temple (still unfinished in 69) 2nd for the Tabularium (finished in 78). 75. 4,500,000 denarii represent the regular issues of the mint of Rome, 5,500,000 denarii the issue of Cn. Lentulus struck in 76-75 outside Rome; I take it that the production of the latter issue is to be connected with the war in Spain and have argued that it may represent the money provided for Metellus by Gaul in 76 (Sallust, Hist, ii, 98M, 9) and that Sallust, Hist, ii, 34 M may provide a record of its production, 'quae pecunia ad Hispaniense bellum Metello facta erat' (NC 1969, 84).
-vi <2
74. The money brought from Cyrene by P. Lentulus Marcellinus as Quaestor in 74 (Sallust, Hist, ii, 43M; there is no evidence that he was Quaestor pro praetore) seems to account for the large issues of that year; much of the money will have gone to the generals in Spain (cf. NC 1969, 84; JRS 1970,46), some will have remained to be spent next year on buying corn in Sicily ex tenants consulto et ex lege Terentia et Cassia frttmentaria (Cicero, in Verr.1 iii, 163; cf. v. 52; Sallust, Hist, iii, 48M, 19; the money was evidently forthcoming, in Verr.1 iii, 173), for the issues of 73 and 72 are exiguous. See in Verr.1 iii, 164 for shortage of money, apparently after the Lex Terentia et Cassia. 73-71. The exiguous issues of this period, rising slightly only in 71, suggest, though they cannot prove, that Crassus paid for his troops in the war against Spartacus, just as Pompeius paid for his sometimes in Spain; for the suggestion made independently of the numismatic evidence see commentary of E. Gabba on Appian, BC i, 549 (Crassus had derived ample wealth from the proscriptions). 71. To this year belongs also in my view the gold issue of Pompeius, no. 402; produced by two obverse dies, it perhaps consisted of 60,000 aurei = 1,500,000 denarii (for the size of the army to which it was presumably distributed see Brunt, Manpower, 471). 67. The relatively large issue of C. Piso Frugi in this year may be connected with the expense of Pompeius' campaign against the pirates. 62. The enormous increase in the volume of coinage this year appears to reflect the cost of the subsidised corn provided under the Lex Porcia of 62 (7,500,000 denarii); if expenditure at this rate was kept up in subsequent years, it must have been from stocks of old coin. 62 is also the year when the extra troops raised to fight Catiline would have been paid and the year in which the Pons Fabricius was built.
ID
tti
!-•—»•
rtff I ! I
rrr
ft?
Amounts of denarii (in millions) 706
:dr
TTT
4+-
58. The corn-dole after 58 cost nearly 27,000,000 denarii a year, if we combine Cicero, Sest. 55 with Plutarch, Pomp. 45; cf. Asconius 8C; Schol. Bob. i32St; some of this increased cost may be reflected in the large issue of M. Scaurus and P. Hypsaeus of this year; but production of coin does not remain at this level. Perhaps more relevant is the likelihood that 58 saw such expenditure as was necessary under Caesar's agrarian law (cf. Cicero, de dom. 23). (The issue of Scaurus and Hypsaeus cannot be connected with the lavish aedilidan games of the former, since both struck the issue; in any case neither evidence nor likelihood supports the view that in normal times an issue of coinage was paid for out of a private individual's pocket.) 56-54. The large issues of 56-55 are perhaps to be associated with Pompeius' cura armonae, the smaller, but still substantial issues of 54 with the building of an embankment along the Tiber in that year.
8 CAREERS OF THE MONEYERS The evidence is best presented in tabular form (for recruitment of the moneyers see pp. 602-3): TABLE Lix. Careers of the moneyers
Number Date
Name of moneyer
133 143 144 147 154
194-190 189-180 189-180 189-180 189-180 179-170 169-158 169-158 169-158 169-158
Tampilus Maenius L. F(urius) P(hilus) Cn. Domitius L. Coilius Talna Cina Varo Murena 3
201 211 220
169-158 155 154 mid-150s 145
P. Blasio Saranus C. Scribonius Q. Metellus M. Iunius
221
144
223 225
142 141
235 253 256 258
137 130 129
262
128
263 265 269 271
127
122
Annius Rufus C. Curiatius Trigeminus L. Atilius Nomentanus Sex. Pompeius L. Opeimius Q. Metellus Sex. Iulius Caisar Metellus M. Metellus Q.f. Q. Maximus C. Metellus Mn. Acilius Balbus C. Cato M. Carbo
122
Q. Minucius Rufus
161
178 185 186 188
189 199
Consul
Praetor
1
Other
168 (?) 170 (?) 171 162
?i7O
Leg. 170 (?) 149 127
Bef. 146
Opeimius
Leg. 146 Leg. 146
154
Late 140s 136 143
148
Praef. Soc. 181 Leg. 168 Tr. PI. betw. 149 and 123-122
274 276 277 1
2 3
131
127 125 125 123
128
Tr. PI. 138 Leg. 120 ?H9 121
125
123 123 117 3 115 116
119
Q. 132
"3 114 114
?late 2nd cent. Leg. 110
? placed before a date indicates that the date is uncertain; (?) placed after a date indicates that the identification of the moneyer and the magistrate of the date in question is extremely uncertain. I do not include Cn. Cornelius (no. 81) or Varo (no. 126) in the table, since it is not certain that they were moneyers; for the men who produced the Narbo issue, also not moneyers, see p. 600. Or the other Opeimius appearing as moneyer in this period, no. 190. Or the Metellus who is Cos. 119.
708
Careers of the moneyers TABLE LIX (COM.) Number Date
Name of moneyer
279 284 285/1 285/2
121 116
290
113 112 112 112 110 110
Carbo Q. Metellus Cn. Domitius M. Silanus C. Fonteius P. Nerva L. Philippus T. Deidius Ap. Claudius T. Manlius C. Pulcher P. Laeca Mn. Aquillius L. Memmius L. Valerius Flaccus M. Herennius A. Manlius Q.f. L. Scipio Asiagenus L. Cota L. Thorius Balbus L. Saturninus
292
293 294 299 299 300 301
303 304 306 308 309 3" 314 316 317 318 319 320 322
325 335/2 340 344 345 346 347 350A 353
115
"5
109 109 108
108 107 107
118-107 106 105 105 104
104 103 103 102 101
96 90
89 88 88 Bef. 87 86 85
354
84
355 357 358 363 379 383 386 387
84 83 83 82 80 79 78 77
Consul
Praetor
Other
113
98* 96 109
?H3 Leg. 91 (?) 104
91
98 79
89 or 88
92
95
Q.99 Tr. PL 107 Q. before moneyer5 Tr. PL in the 90s
101
Q. before moneyer 100
93 Leg. 107-105 (?) 83 ?95
C. Coilius Caldus Q. Thermus M.f. L. Iulius L.f. Caesar C. Fabius C.f. L. Sentius C.f. C. Malleolus L. Piso L.f.L.n. Frugi L. Titurius L.f. Sabinus Cn. Lentulus C. Censorinus M. Fonteius [M.] Ver[gilius] Mn. Fonteius C.f. C. Licinius L.f. Macer C. Cassius C. Norbanus Laterensis L. Censorinus L. Procilius f. Ti. Claudius Ti.f. Ap.n. L. Cassius Q.f. L. Rutilius Flaccus
94 90
Tr. PL 103 Leg. 79 Tr. PL 103 and 100; Q. before Tr. PL, therefore before moneyer Tr. PL before moneyer Leg. 89
95 84 ?93-89 Q. 80 74 Leg. 75
72 ?75
Leg. 82 Q.84 Tr. PL 87 Tr. Mil., date uncert.
?68 73 38
4
43* Curule mag., date uncert. Leg. 707 Senator in 56 Bef. 63 66 Senator in 72
Or the Q. Metellus who is Cos. 109. * Inscr. It. xiii, 3, no. 70. ' The lateness of this praetorship presumably results from the disabilities placed on the sons of the proscribed by Sulla, removed only by Caesar. 1 If not proscribed. 709
Careers of the numeyers TABLE LIX (cottt.) Number
Date
394
74
401
71 70 70
403 404 405 408 411 412
413 415 418 419 420 421
425 426 427 428
69 67
65 64 63 62 61 61 60
59 56 56
433 434 435
56 55 54 54 53
436
52
437
51
438 439 449 450 453 463 474
51 50
512
48 48 47 46
45 41
Name of moneyer
Consul Praetor
C. Postumius Mn. Aquillius Mn.f. Mn.n. Kalenus 47 T. Vettius Sabinus M. Plaetorius Cestianus C. Piso L.f. Frugi L. Torquatus L. Roscius Fabatus Longinus Paullus Lepidus 50 M. Piso M.f. Frugi M. Lepidus 46 P. Ypsaeus Sufenas Philippus 38 Faustus C. Memmius C.f. Q. Cassius 41" Brutus Q. Pompeius Rufus Messala f. 32 L. Vinicius 33 Caldus Ser. Sulpicius Marcellinus C. Vibius C.f. C.n. Pansa 43 4210 Albinus Bruti f. L. Plautius Plancus Mn. Cordius Rufus L. Valerius Acisculus C. Clodius C.f. Vestalis
' Also Aed. Cur., no. 409. * Also Aed. Cur., no. 422.
Other Cand. for Pr. 62 Senator in 74 (?)
59 59 ?64
Q. ?7i 8 Q.by70 Q.58
49
49 Procos. 48
53 44
49 ?55 55
44
Q. ?66»
Q.54 Tr. PI. 54 Q.? 5 2 Q.53 Tr. PI. 52
Q.50 Senator in 49 Q.48 Tr. PI. 51 43 Date uncert. Tr. PL, date uncert. Procos.> date uncert.
Actually Cos. Desig.
Insofar as there is a normal pattern, it is of men serving as moneyers in their 20s;1 but there are two periods when there seems to be a tendency for the moneyership to be held instead shordy before the praetorship or consulship (isolated examples of this of course occur throughout). The first of die two periods in question runs for just over a decade from c. 130 onwards, when the phenomenon is perhaps to be explained by the hypothesis that the institution of the secret ballot for elections by the Lex Gabinia of 139 led some men (mainly from the nobilitas) to feel that a little extra self-advertisement before the run-up to the praetorship and the consulship 1
Note in this connection M. Aurelius Cota, no. 229, also C. Norbanus, no. 357, moneyer in 83, then barred from office as one of the sons of the proscribed, still alive to hold the consulship in 38. 710
Careers of the numeyers was desirable.1 The second of the two periods falls during the First Civil War and one is tempted to suggest that Caesar accelerated the careers of some of his moneyers, C. Pansa, D. Brutus and L. Plautius Plancus.2 One result of the possibility of holding the moneyership late in life was that a man might be moneyer after holding the quaestorship3 or the tribunate,4 a fact which serves to highlight the lack of connection between moneyership and the normal cursus honorum? Although there are variations in the percentage of moneyers attested in higher office later,6 diese variations are rarely large enough to be significant, given the inadequacy of our knowledge of the magistrates of the Republic. The pattern is particularly striking at three points - there is a concentration of moneyers who go on to become Consuls in the period after the passing of the Lex Gabinia in 139, very few of die moneyers of the 70s are later attested in higher office, and a large number of the moneyers of the 60s and 50s do achieve higher office - but it is impossible to be certain that the reasons are more than casual.7 1 3
Cf. T. P. Wiseman, New Men, 148-9. It is not clear why the fashion came to an end. See also p. 729 for coin types which mark the moneyership as in some sense a substitute for the aedileship. There is unfortunately no certain information about their dates of birth, but for D. Brutus see F. MUnzer, RE Supp. v, 370 (still adulescens in the late 50s). I regard it as possible that C. Pansa was appointed as governor of Bithynia without having held the praetorship (cf. p. 92). The Illviri r.p.c. do not seem to have followed the example of Caesar when they were in power after 43. Nos. 26s, 300, 304, 317, ?4Oi, 404, 405, 420 (see Table). Nos. 318, 350A, 449 (see Table); see also on no. 485. The moneyership did not qualify a man to become a member of the Senate (see p. 602); it is perhaps what one would expect that only two moneyers are later attested as simple Senators (nos. 379 and 387). The arguments of C. D. Hamilton, TAPA 1969, 181, are based on a very incomplete list of careers. For the first point see T. P. Wiseman, New men, 148-9, also p. 728 below (Wiseman's suggested identifications differ from mine in some cases); the apparent success of the moneyers of the 60s and 50s may reflect use of the moneyership as a means of acquiring support by men likely in any case to advance far (see also p. 619).
711
9 TYPES AND LEGENDS The legends and types of ancient coins could be used in two ways, to indicate the authority responsible for the coins and to convey a message put out by that authority. The first piece of information must be given for a coin to be a coin at all, the second may be regarded as an optional extra. The Greeks, who took over the Lydian invention of coinage and spread it through the Greek world, on the whole concerned themselves only with indicating the audiority responsible for an issue of coinage. The important coinages of classical Greece bore more or less constant types which were the badges of the issuing cities. Thus the silver tetradrachms of Athens bore the head of Athena on one side and the owl of Athena on the other. With the advent of the Hellenistic monarchs the same approach to coin types was only given a new twist. Their coins bore not only dieir tides, rfroXetAabu BacnX£ws, of King Ptolemy, etc., but also their portraits, as their badge and the symbol of their sovereignty. When the Roman Republic took over the notion of coinage, it took over also the Greek attitude towards coin types. For a century the types of die Roman coinage referred, insofar as they referred to anydiing at all, exclusively to Rome or her gods; these public coin types continued to be struck, although with decreasing frequency, almost to the end of the Republic. But gradually the magistrates responsible for. the production of the coinage came to regard themselves as the authority responsible for it. Their names, which at first stood side by side widi die name of Rome, eventually stood alone; die types which diey chose were distinctive to themselves. And since they were often appointed from the ranks of the nobilitas, die coinage increasingly reflected the competitive preoccupations of die Republican oligarchy. With die beginning of the Civil Wars the heads of Caesar, Antony, Octavian, Brutus and the others appeared on the coinage, in imitation of the coinage of the Hellenistic monarchs. The message conveyed by both types and legends became progressively less Republican. The late Triumviral coinage of Octavian was already Imperial in character. A discussion of the legends and types of the Roman Republican coinage dius falls naturally into three parts: the period with public types, the development of private types and the propaganda of the Civil Wars. My aim throughout is rather to indicate the principles which should be followed in interpretation than to provide an exhaustive account of every type and all its possible associations.1 The treatment is in any 1
The programme of research put forward by A. D. Momigliano, RSI 1958, 131 = Quarto contributo, 631 ('Si sente il bisogno di uno studio sistematico sulle relazioni della monetazione romana con la storiografia da un lato e con la poesia dall'altro'), is hardly practicable. For the period during which 712
Public types case fuller for the public types and for the types of the Civil Wars, since these are not discussed in the course of the Catalogue. I
PUBLIC TYPES
In complete contrast to the denarius coinage, the didrachm coinage (nos. 1-43) displays only types which may be regarded as public;1 although these are very different in the two component parts of the didrachm coinage, both parts share one important characteristic; both reflect the complete lack of interest of whoever was responsible for choosing the types, presumably the Censors (see pp. 42-3). Many of the types have no conceivable significance and were presumably only selected because it was an accepted convention that a coin or coin-like object such as a piece of aw signatum had to have something on it. One can sometimes guess at the mental associations behind the types selected; but the process of selection was apparendy sometimes quite random.2 I doubt if in this period types were often, if ever, consciously selected because they symbolised particular concepts felt to be important; certainly the mechanical linking of types with particular ideas or events is rarely a fruitful approach for this section of the Republican coinage. The didrachms and their token bronze fractions The first two issues of didrachms were military issues, produced at mints in South Italy in the course of the war against Pyrrhus, and naturally depended to a certain extent on Greek models ;3 it is no surprise that the types chosen were not distinctively Roman, although it is sometimes possible to see how they perhaps suggested themselves to a Roman mind. The head of Mars on the obverse of the first issue was appropriate enough for a war coinage4 and the horse's head on the reverse was perhaps part of the same imagery; a horse was later regarded as an animal symbolical of war,6 and at the festival of the October equus a horse was sacrificed to Mars and its head became the trophy in a contest between the inhabitants of die Sacra Via and public types were used there is virtually no contemporary literature, for the later period the types used were determined by the accident of who became a moneyer. It is also disappointing that the coins preserve little record of events not mentioned by the Roman. annalistic tradition or of practices not attested by literary sources (though see, for instance, commentary on no. 234; on this problem, with regard to monuments, see A. D. Momigliano, JRS 1957, 114 = Secondo contribute, 86). 1 I do not discuss the types of nos. 1-2, wholly derived from Greek models. ' Compare the process of selection of symbols used as control-marks; the assertion to the contrary of C. H. V. Sutherland, JRS 1959, 55, is based on no reasoned argument. ' Thus the artistic inspiration for the head of Mars on no. 13 derives ultimately from the coinage of Syracuse (BMC Sicily, Syracuse, no. 308), cf. p. 39 n. 5. * For Mars in this period note Valerius Maximus i, 8, 6 (278 B.C.), creditum est Martem patrem tune populo suo (in the defence of Thurii) adfuisse. Mars was also regarded as the father of Romulus, but there can be no certainty that this was relevant to the choice of type. * Vergil, Georgia ii, 145; ken. i, 441-5; iii, 537-43; J. Bayet, REL 1941,166; J.-P. Brisson, Hommages Renard i, 162 and 169. For an early assertion of the Roman, rather than Carthaginian associations of the type, see W. Ridgeway, PCPhS 1925, 26.
713
Types and legends the Subura.1 The significance, if any, of the head of Apollo and the prancing horse on the second issue of didrachms is unknown.2 Of the types of the token bronze associated with the first two issues of didrachms, Head of Minerva/Horse's head and Head of goddess/Lion, Minerva, later venerated as custos urbis Romae,3 had at any rate Roman associations (see below). If the goddess on the other issue is Venus (compare the head on the third issue of aesgrave, no. 19/2), it may relate to beliefs in Trojan origins ;4 the reverse type, taken with the obverse type, recalls Ly cophron's description of Romulus and Remus as lions (Alexandra 1232-4), descended from Venus.5 With the beginning of silver coinage at Rome itself in 269-268, at least one distinctively Roman type appears, the wolf and twins on the reverse of the didrachm, copying the statue set up in 296 by Cn. Ogulnius and Q. Ogulnius:6 the head of Hercules on the obverse may be that of Hercules Victor, highly suitable for a coinage struck from the spoils of war and perhaps reflecting the Roman ideology of military prowess.7 But the inventive mood did not last. The types of the fourth issue of didrachms, struck during the First Punic War, Head of Roma (see below)/Victory with palm-branch and wreath,8 reproduce essentially the same themes as the third issue; at the same time the head of Minerva recurs on a small issue of token bronze, associated with an eagle on a thunderbolt as reverse type (borrowed from the coinage of the Mamertines,9 at whose mint the issue was struck). The three issues of didrachms which followed the First Punic War bore types which were mere repetitions or 1
Polybius xii, 4b (Timaeus) with commentary of F. W. Walbank; U. W. Scholz, Studien zum Marskult, 81-167; G. Dumizil, Ril. rom. arch., 217-29, against the view of Frazer, Rose and W. Warde Fowler, Festivals, 241-50, that the sacrificed horse was a corn-spirit; the corn-ear beside the horse's head on the coin may be a mint-mark (see p. 39 n. 5) or a mint-official's mark and may not be taken as evidence for this view. * M. Sorda, Roma e i Sanniti, 40 with n. 5, is no help. 9 Cicero, de leg. ii, 42; de dom. 144; ad Alt. vii, 3, 3; Dio xxxviii, 17, 5; Plutarch, Cic. 31; for the later vicissitudes of Cicero's statue, Cicero, Jam. xii, 25, 1; Dio xlv, 17, 3; Obsequens 68. 4 A. AlfOldi, Urahnen, 30-3, goes too far when he asserts that Rome chose her coin types to emphasise her Trojan origins and thereby express her hostility to her neighbours. 6 I accept the traditional date for Lycophron's Alexandra, see S. Weinstock, HThRev 1957, 247; bibliography and an opposing view in St. Josifovui, RE Supp. xi, 925-30. * If I am right in holding that the Censors were responsible for the successive issues of the didrachm coinage (see pp. 42-3), the interpretation of F. Altheim, Congress 1936,144-50, of this issue in terms of the family history of the Ogulnii and the Fabii (who provided the Consuls of 269) cannot be right; I regard it as in any case anachronistic, see below, n. 7. For the statue of the wolf and twins see Livy x, 23; D. Hal. i, 79,8; A. Rosenberg, RE iA, 1080; and especially L. Curtius, MDAI(R) 1933, 196-213. 1 For the modelling of the story of Romulus on that of Hercules, see A. R. Anderson, HSCPh 1928, 29-31, though I am not at all convinced that this coin presupposes the process of assimilation. For the increasing attention paid at Rome in the early third century to gods of victory see S. Weinstock, RE viiiA, 2486-7; 2505-6; 2511-12 (2606 on the coinage is not satisfactory; see pp. 720 and 721 below for Victory as a public type, p. 726 below for Victory as a moneyer's symbol); for Hercules Invictus see J. Bayet, Hercule, 325-32; for the early association of Hercules with triumphs see L. Bonfante Warren, JTiS 1970, 55 with nn. 43-4. There can be no connection between the coin type and C. Fabius Pictor, Cos. 269, since the connection between the gens Fabia and Hercules is an Augustan fiction, see p. 727 n. 2; A. Lippold, Consules, 351-3 is wrong. * For the palm-branch and wreath see Livy x, 47, 3 (293 B.C.), eodem anno coronati primum ob res bello bene gestas ludos Romanos spectarunt palmaeque turn primum translato e Graeco more victorious datae, with P. Wolters, Festschrift H. WOlfflin, 17. • Contra H. MObius, Alexandria und Rom, 24.
714
Public types permutations of those of the first two issues of didrachms, with the addition in two cases of small differential symbols. Only with Rome's last issue of didrachms, the so-called quadrigati, did new types appear, a Janiform head of die Dioscuri on die obverse1 and Jupiter in a quadriga driven by Victory on the reverse;2 the Dioscuri had acquired the role of protectors of die Roman people as a result of their intervention on the Roman side at the batde of Lake Regillus,3 Jupiter was die god in whose honour a Roman triumph was held; 4 quadrigati were first produced in 225 and die types were presumably chosen in response to die Gallic threat. The reverse type of die issue of gold associated widi quadrigati of die Second Punic War, an oath-taking scene, is presumably a call to loyalty addressed to Rome's allies, whatever die precise symbolism involved.8 1
The head occurs also on aes grave (see below) and on the issue of C. Fonteius (no. 290), where it certainly represents the Dioscuri; it should be regarded as representing primarily the Dioscuri here rather than the Penates (contra A. Alfoldi, Early Rome, 260; AJA 1959, 21 with n. 260; the oathtaking scene, which is the last reverse type to be associated with the head within the didrachm coinage, is clearly irrelevant to its identification); for the assimilation of the Penates to the Dioscuri see on no. 307. For sculptured beardless Janiform heads see K. Latte, RRg, pi. 15 with p. 135 n. 4 (= G. Wissowa, RuK, 105 n. 7); A. AlfOldi, Early Rome, pi. 3, 2 (see Addenda). s For the type compare the statue of Jupiter in a quadriga erected on the ridge of the Capitoline temple in 296 (Livy x, 23,12 with H. Mattingly,,7/?.S 1945, 73); for the Roman belief in the dependence of Roman power on the safety of the statue, see Festus, s.v. Ratumenna porta; cf. Servius on Vergil, Aen. vii, i88; Plutarch, Pob. 13; Pliny, NH viii, i6i;xxviii, 16; xxxv, 157; L. Gerschel, Journal de Ptychologie 1952, 58. Note the type of no. 35OA/1-2 in 86 B.C. The incuse legend which occurs on early quadrigati is perhaps intended to recall an inscribed statue base (B. Pick, Frankfurter Miinzzeitung 1917, 252); the incuse legends on some early denarii and victoriati are presumably the result of random copying. 9 Livy ii, 20, 12; 42, 5 with commentary of R. M. Ogilvie; R. M. Ogilvie, Hommages Renard ii, 566, for a reassertion of the traditional view that the temple of the Dioscuri was vowed as part of the exoratio of the Dioscuri at the battle of Lake Regillus; Cicero, ND ii, 6; iii, 11; D. Hal. vi, 13; Florus i> 5 (i> n)>4; devir. ill. 16; Valerius Maximus i, 8, 1; Frontinus, Strat. i, 11, 8; Plutarch, Cor. 3; Paul 25 for the appearance of the Dioscuri in the battle. The view of M. Albert, Castor et Pollux, 67-74, that the Roman choice of the Dioscuri as a coin type has ' une origine toute pacifique, toute commerciale' is absurd. 4 Note also the temple of Jupiter Victor, whose temple was vowed in 295 (Livy x, 29,14); ILLRP 187 records an early dedication. 5 For similar representations on gems see A. Furtwangler, Beschreibung, no. 1135 ( = Antike Gemmen, pi. 27, 34) and 1136 (= J. Bleicken, JNG 1963, pi. 8, 18); Antike Gemmen, pi. 46, 2 (cf. G. Micali, Antichi popoli i, pi. 117, 16-17); J. Bleicken, JNG 1963, pi. 8, 17; for a similar representation on a lanx see B. Svoboda, JRS 1968, 124. I no longer believe (cf. Congress 1967,156 n. 19) that the type of an oath-taking scene has anything to do with coniuratio, let alone with the procedure described by Livy xxii, 38,1-5, which effectively marked the end of coniuratio, the mutual pledge of solidarity among soldiers (A. D. Momigliano, JRS 1967, 253); neither evidence nor probability supports the view that the voluntarium foedus of Livy xxii, 38, 1-5 involved the sacrifice of a pig, as portrayed on the coinage (contra J. Bleicken, JNG 1963, 51; cf. H. U. Instinsky, JNG 1964, 83). There may be something in the conjecture of A. Alfoldi (AJA 1959,20-1, wrongly dating the issue to 209) that the people represented are Latinus and Aeneas (Vergil, Aen. xii, 161-215; cf- Cato, Origines, frr. 8-1 lP; Naevius, Punica i9-2oWarmington); there is, however, no reason to suppose that the spears which the two warriors are understandably carrying in any sense preside over the oath or that the sceptrum of Vergil, Aen. xii, 206-11, fulfils any ritual function. But the coinage is not exactly explicit and the treaty between Titus Tatius and Romulus (Vergil, Aen. viii, 639-41; for a representation of the scene see Servius on this passage) or the treaty between Rome and Alba Longa (livy i, 24, 4-9 with commentary of R. M. Ogilvie; Livy believed that this was the first foedus) remain possibilities (see Addenda). For the oddity that the silex, with which the pig is killed in the literary sources on the foedus, is missing in representations of a foedus, see G. Wissowa, RuK, 552 n. 5.
715
Types and legends Aes signatum and aes grave The antipathy of the Republic to innovation in the choice of coin types appears most clearly of all in the cast bronze coinage which ran parallel to the didrachm coinage. The types used may be tabulated (see Table LX). Within the first eight issues, not only are the types of nos. 25,26 and 27 repeated from those of nos. 14, 18 and 21, with the addition of small differential symbols (compare the silver of nos. 25 and 27), but the types of no. 21 are in large measure adapted from those of no. 14. It is also noticeable that the types of the larger denominations are very different in kind from those of the lower denominations. All asses and most semisses portray a deity or deities;1 only one lower denomination does so, the sextans of nos. 18 and 26. It is conceivable that an element of deliberate selection was involved as far as the types of the asses and semisses of nos. 14,18,19 and 24 were concerned, although it is not now possible to say what the process of reasoning was; the types of the lower denominations were doubdess selected entirely at random; Greek and Roman weights were also customarily decorated widi conventional designs, whose function was simply to distinguish one weight from another. The types appearing on aes signatum (perhaps produced in the years 280-260) show the same approach as those on aes grave. Obverse and reverse types (if they can be called thus) are mostly identical or related: Two cornuacopiae/Branch, ROMANOM, no. 3 Eagle/Pegasus, ROMANOM, no. 4 (for the association of Pegasus and Jupiter, see Hesiod, Theog. 285-6)" Bull/Bull, no. 5 Corn-ear/Tripod, no. 63 Outside of shield/Inside of shield, no. 74 Sword/Scabbard, no. 85 1
2
3 4
6
For the Dioscuri see p. 715 above. As for Mercury, I doubt if the reputed presence of KnpuKiot among the Trojan relics at Lavinium according to D. Hal. i, 67, 4 (Timaeus) provides evidence for an association of Mercury with the origins of Rome {contra A. Alfoldi, Early Rome, 285). For Roma see p. 721 below. The view of G. Nenci, Pirro, 81-4 (chaotic); RFIC 1955, 402 and 398-9 that this bar records the conflict between Pyrrhus and Rome, the eagle symbolising Pyrrhus, the Pegasus symbolising Rome, is unacceptable; to a Roman the first thing suggested by an eagle was surely Jupiter, the deity round whom a Roman triumph centred; and Nenci's identification of the Pegasus with the horse attested as a Roman military signum is entirely unwarranted - the Romans were surely capable of distinguishing the two. Linked with the capture of Croton in 277 by G. Nenci, PdelP 1963, 56, implausibly. G. Hafner, following R. Herbig, believes the reverse type to be a wheel (Jahrbuch des Ro'm.-Germ. Zentralmuseums 1963, 34); it does not look like one. The belief of A. Alfoldi that the shields are Celtic is without foundation; the Celtic shield on bronze coins of Ariminum cited as a parallel, MDAI(R) 1961, 75-6, has pointed ends, not rounded ends; see the illustration in R. Thomsen, ERC iii, 192, with discussion. Neither the sword nor the scabbard is Celtic, contra A. Alfoldi, MDAKJR) 1961, 73-4; the pommel of the sword is invariably single, the tip of the scabbard in no way resembles that illustrated in RA 1927, 156 fig. 14 = 166 fig. 33 (cf. figs. 34-6)-
716
TABLE LX. Issue
18
14
19
Types o/aes grave
21
24
26
25
27
35-6
As
Dioscuri Mercury
Apollo ApoUo
Dioscurus ApoUo
Roma Roma
Roma Wheel
Dioscuri Mercury
Apollo Apollo
Roma Roma
Janus Prow
Semis
Minerva1 Goddess2
Pegasus Pegasus
Roma Goddess 2
Minerva1 Minerva1
Bull Wheel
Minerva1 Goddess 2
Pegasus Pegasus
Minerva1 Minerva1
Saturn3 Prow
Triens
Thunderbolt Dolphin
Horse's head Horse's head
Thunderbolt Thunderbolt
Horse Wheel
Thunderbolt Dolphin
Thunderbolt Minerva* Thunderbolt Prow4
Hand
Boar
Hand Hand
Dog Wheel
Boar Hand Barley-grains Boar
Hand Hand
Hercules Prow4
Sextans
SheU Caduceus
Dioscurus Dioscurus
Shell Shell
Tortoise Wheel
SheU Caduceus
Shell Shell
Mercury Prow
Uncia
Knucklebone Barley-grain Barley-grain
Knucklebone Knucklebone
Acorn
Acorn Acorn
Quadrans
Semuncia 1
Knucklebone
Dioscurus Dioscurus
Knucklebone Roma5 Knucklebone Prow
This head could perhaps be that of Mars; but the side-burn present on no. 25/1 and no. 27/1 is here missing. This head is perhaps that of Venus, compare the heads illustrated in Roscher i, 400. 3 These heads are identified as those of Saturn and Minerva by the attributes which appear on the reverses of no. 285/3-4. * The reverse type is described as a ratis rather than a navis by Pliny, NH xxxiii, 45 and Festus.- s.v. Ratitum quadrantem, both from Verrius Flaccus. Verrius Flaccus surely started from the poetic phrase of Lucilius, quadrantis ratiti {Sat. 1272 M = Varro, LL v, 44), and simply invented a special type for the triens as well as the quadrans. I do not believe the involved explanation of H. Zehnacker, Hommages Renard iii, 695, arguing that Verrius Flaccus was familiar with the whole of the Fleet bronze coinage of M. Antonius, which was struck in minute quantities and circulated only in the East. The fragmentary text of Festus should surely be regarded as being about the Legionary denarii of M. Antonius (see p. 744 n. 1). 6 For the head of Roma see p. 721. 2
Types and legends Elephant/Sow, no. 9 1 Anchor/Tripod, no. 10 Trident/Caduceus, no. 11 (both tied with fillets and presumably alluding together to naval success) Chickens feeding/Tridents, no. 12 (presumably alluding together to naval success)2 It is difficult to regard the selection of die types Sword/Scabbard and Shield/Shield as anything but arbitrary, the adoption of designs which happened to suggest diemselves.3 Only in a few cases can we point to die reasons why certain designs may have suggested diemselves. Nos. 10,11 and 12 apparendy allude to naval success in die First Punic War, no. 9 may perhaps preserve a record of an incident in die Pyrrhic War, when Pyrrhus' elephants were frightened away by die presence of pigs.4 For all one knows, no. 5 may have an awareness of the etymology of. pecunia, from pecus = cattle, behind it.5 Of die first eight issues of aes grave, no. 24 stands out by reason of the uniform reverse type of a wheel, perhaps adopted because it was decorative and fitted neady onto die face of a coin. The same approach to design is apparent on the last issue of aes grave, provided widi a prow as unvarying reverse type, doubdess pardy as a neat artistic contrast to a wheel.6 The obverse of each denomination from as to uncia bears a different deity, perhaps by conscious choice, diough the selection now appears entirely random. Certainly no connection need be supposed between die reverse type and die head of Janus which forms die obverse type of die as.7 The fact diat die types of Rome's last issue of aes grave8 remained those of her bronze coinage for over a century finally led Roman antiquarians to speculate on their significance. The attribution by the Greeks of die golden age under Kronos to the 1
There is no evidence for the view that the sow per se was the badge of the Latins, contra A. Alfoldi, Early Rome, 272. * The two stars, presumably of the two Dioscuri, recall their r61e as protectors of sailors; for the two chickens, also connected with the two Dioscuri, see Callimachus, Epigr. 56Pfeiffer; H. Dressel and A. Milchhofer, MDAI{A) 1877, 389 no. 209. R. Thomsen, ERC iii, 143-5, misunderstands the types. 1 The correlation between the types on aes signatum and the devices on early legionary signa (one out of the five offered by Pliny, NH x, 5, eagle, wolf, minotaur, horse and boar (not sow), cf. Festus s.w. Minotauri and Porci effigies) is too imperfect to be significant, contra G. Nenci, RFIC 1955» 39i-4<>4 (citing earlier bibliography). 4 Aelian, NA i, 38 with R. Thomsen, ERC iii, 145-7. 6 For the fallacious view that pecunia was so called because coins displayed cattle as types, see Varro, LL v, 92; RR ii, 1, 9; de vit. p. Rom. i, fr. 11R; P. Kehl, Finanzarchiv 1950-51,131, the last refuted by B. Laum, Finanzarchiv 1950-51, 352. E. Benveniste, Le Vocabulaire des institutions indoeuropiennes i, 47, derives pecunia and pecus from *peku, meaning 'richesse mobiliaire personnelle'. * The choice of type may also reflect Roman consciousness of the possession of sea power. ' L. A. Holland, Janus, 276-7, argues that the prow alludes to Janus' function as a god of river crossings; but the prow is plainly that of a warship. The connection of Janus with the victories over Antium or at Mylae is tenuous and fortuitous (L. A. Holland, 220-1). * With the exception of the curious Minerva/Bull issue (no. 37); the types of this, with a deity on the obverse, but not on the reverse, seem modelled on those of the Janus/Prow series. I suspect that the bull figures here for the same reason as in the case of the bar with Bull/Bull (no. 5, cf. above); certainly it has nothing to do with Samnium. The issue does not look as if it was produced at Rome and was perhaps produced for a special distribution of booty, conceivably after the victory of Telamon in 225. For distribution of booty compare p. 41 n. 5 on aes signatum.
718
Public types Roman god Saturn and the consequent postulation of Saturn as an early Italian king1 provided the basis for type interpretation; but the stories about Saturn arriving by ship to be welcomed by Janus or about Janus as inventor of ship-building2 are worthless as evidence for the original significance of the types. Nor is there any reason to suppose that Romans or Italians ever regarded Saturn on the coinage as symbolising Italy;3 this is a Greek literary conceit,4 which never affected popular consciousness. The curious types of the collateral issue of bronze struck in the early years of the Second Punic War call for some comment. There is some trace, understandable enough, of emphasis on Rome; the sextans bears the wolf and twins on one side, an eagle bringing nourishment to them on the other side;8 the two stars on the uncia presumably represent the Dioscuri;6 the goddess with the mural crown is presumably the city-goddess of Rome;7 the triens and quadrans seem paired, with Juno on the obverse of the triens suggesting the bull on the reverse of the quadrans,8 Hercules 1
G. Wissowa, RuK, 206 n. 8; the identification of Kronos and Saturn is known to Livius Andronicus, K. Latte, RRg, 254 with n. 4; the story of Saturn's arrival in Italy is known to Ennius (Ann. 25 V = Varro, LL v, 42 with F. Bomer, Die Fasten ii, 31; cf. Cicero, ND iii, 61-4) and Cassius Hemina (fr. IP). 2 For Saturn arriving by ship to be welcomed by Janus, see Ovid, Fasti i, 229-35 > Macrobius, Sat. i, 7, 22; Servius on Vergil, Aen. viii, 357; Tertullian, Apol. 10, 7-8; Lactantius, Inst. Div. i, 13, 6-7; origo gent. Rom. 1, 3; 3, 1 and 4; Schol. vet. in Pers. sat. ii, 59, ed. O. Jahn; for Janus as inventor of ship-building, see Athenaeus xv, 692d-e; Eustathius on Homer, Od. v, 249; cf. Plutarch, QR 274e-f. T. O. Mabbott, Num. Rev. 7, 1945, 5, is naive. 5 See the controversy, R. J. Rowland, CP 1967, 185; M. H. Crawford, CP 1969, 37; R. J. Rowland, CP 1969, 38. I should now go further and maintain that Saturn never evoked 'Italian' feelings in Romans or Italians of the late Republic, let alone doing so by appearing on the coinage. Saturn was a purely Roman god (G. Wissowa, RuK, 206-7), whose cult has no epigraphic or numismatic testimony outside Rome during the Republic. The view that Saturn was Sabine (Varro, LL v, 74; Vergil, Aen. vii, 178-80) and the view that the Italians called Italy Saturnia (D. Hal. i, 35, 3; cf. 18, 2; 34, 1 and 5) are equally undeserving of respect (D. Hal. i, 35, 3 clearly does not derive, like the rest of the chapter, from Antiochus (FGH 555, fr. 5) and Hellanicus (FGH 4, fr. 111)). It is paradoxical to suppose with Rowland that the Romans would have adopted a symbol for Italy which was meaningless to the Italians; inspection in any case suffices to establish that the heads of Saturn on the supposedly abnormal semisses cited by Rowland as evidence for his view are the same as on any other semisses. * Adopted by, e.g., Ennius, Ann. 25V; Euhem. 5V; Vergil, Aen. viii, 322 j compare, e.g., Hesiod, Erga 109-20 and 166-73 with Vergil, Georgics ii, 136-76; cf. Macrobius, Sat. i, 7, 37 (Accius). 6 Although the literary sources know only of a picus (woodpecker) bringing nourishment to the twins (see on no. 235), it seems likely to me that the obverse of this coin alludes to a version of the story of the wolf and twins in which an eagle brings nourishment. It is at any rate clear that different birds were involved in different ways in the story. The denarius of Sex. Pompeius (no. 235/1) shows a woodpecker and two rather nondescript birds perching on the tree; Calene pots (R. Pagenstecher, Calenische Reliefkeramik, 34) show two nondescript birds perching on the tree; gems (A. Furtwangler, Antike Gemmen, pi. 28, 58, cf. 60; cf. Beschreibung, nos. 4379-80; 4392-5; G. M. A. Richter, Gems of the Romans, no. 40) show one nondescript bird perching on the tree; the mirror from Bolsena (A. Klugmann, Annali 1879, 38; it is perhaps not genuine) shows an owl and a woodpecker (cf. Servius on Vergil, Aen. i, 273, cum eos Faustulus animadvertisset nutriri a fera et picum parramque circumvolitare; Nonius 518M, est Parra Vestae, picus Afarftj); the mosaic from Marino (G. Tomasetti, MDAI(R) 1886, 3) shows an eagle (clearly) and a vulture; the Ostia altar and the so-called Ara Pacis show an eagle; the anonymous denarius (no. 287/1) shows what are probably two ravens (compare no. 489/1-4) in flight, as an augurium. • For the association of Sol and Luna with the Dioscuri, compare no. 335/ib-c and loa-b. ' Cf. P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 277 n. 719. 1 Cf. A. B. Cook, Zeus i, 444; M. Renard, Phoibos 1950-51, 141; Rev. Beige. Phil. 1953, 11-12; G. Dumezil, Eranos 1954, 118 n. 2, doubts the importance of the links between Juno and the bull.
719
Types and legends on the obverse of the quadrans suggesting Hercules and the centaur on the reverse of the triens.1 The head of Juno as obverse type of the largest denomination, the triens, is perhaps associated with die Roman exoratio of Juno from Carthage during the Second Punic War;2 die type itself is almost certainly copied from diat of a Hispano-Punic issue.3 The denarius coinage Widi die institution of the denarius coinage in 211, die coin types of die Republic evolved further. For die denarius itself and its silver fractions, die head of Roma (see below) was chosen as obverse type, as reverse type die Dioscuri charging into battle widi levelled spears, as at die battle of Lake Regillus (see p. 715 n. 3). The symbolism of die reverse of die quadrigatus was developed to provide die types of die victoriatus, Head of Jupiter/Victory crowning a trophy.4 And on die gold coinage the head of Mars reappeared, presumably because appropriate to a war coinage, associated widi an eagle on a diunderbolt as reverse type. Originally borrowed from the coinage of die Mamertines, die type now doubdess bore an entirely Roman air and symbolised die expected triumph of Roman arms.5 The bigati The Mars/Eagle gold coinage and die silver fractions of die denarius were only struck for a few years and from about 207 die Republican coinage consisted of die denarius, die victoriatus and die bronze coinage. The types of die bronze coinage remained constant from this point until die middle of the second century, the types of die victoriatus until it ceased to be struck c. 170. But during die first decade of the second century a second reverse type for the denarius, Luna in a biga,6 appeared 1
Note also the links between Juno and Hercules, J. Bayet, Hercule, 379-89; M. Renard, Hommages Bayet, 611. Servius on Vergil, Aen. xii, 841; G. Dumczil, La Religion romaine archatque, 453 (placing the exoratio without argument at the end of the war); cf. 445-54 for the prominence of Juno in Roman religious observance during the war, Ennius, Ann. 291V for Juno giving her favour to Rome during the war. ' E. S. G. Robinson, Essays Mattingly, 46, Series 1 (PI. 1, i(a) and i(f)); Robinson denies the copying; but the head-gear on the Roman piece is surely a misunderstood derivation from that on the Punic pieces; the analogous Capuan type (for which see NC 1964, pi. v, 2) is closer to the Punic pieces than to the Roman piece. 4 For a gem with Victory and trophy see Suetonius, Galba 10; the type cannot, of course, have been a prototype for the coinage of Atella in 215, contra J.-B. Giard, Congres 1961, 239. 5 The eagle was the bird of Jupiter and decorated the ivory sceptre of the triumphator (W. Ehlers, RE viiA, 507); for the symbolism, compare the reverse type of L. Cota, no. 314. The aquila argentea, which symbolised Catiline's hopes (Cicero, in Cat. i, 24; ii, 13), was doubtless merely the legionary standard of Marius carried in Catiline's last battle (Sallust, Cat. 59, 3). • For the suitability of the biga to Luna see Tertullian, de sped. 9; Isidorus, Etymologiae xviii, 36, 1; Cassiodorus, Var. iii, 51, 6; Anthol. Lat. 197, i7Riese. I know of no satisfactory explanation for the adoption of the type, though it was sometimes held that the city of Rome (cf. above, p. 719 n. 7) was in the tutela of Luna (G. Wissowa, RuK, 338 n. 1) and Luna was associated with the Dioscuri on a mirror from Praeneste (Helbig3 ii, 1756). The temple of Luna existed by 182 (Livy xl, 2, 2). The suggestion of A. Klugmann, ZfN 1878, 70-2, that all biga types were associated with the circus is implausible and in any case explains nothing. It is not possible to distinguish firmly between Luna and Diana; I adopt the designation Luna 1
720
Public types alongside the Dioscuri. The two types existed side by side down to the temporary suppression of the denarius c. 170. With the revival of the denarius c. 157, the Dioscuri continued to serve as a reverse type, together with a new type, Victory in a biga,1 surely chosen to reflect Rome's predominance in the Mediterranean after the battle of Pydna.2 Private types had already appeared with the issue of L. Mamilius (no. 149); they soon became dominant. The head of Roma3 There is a problem of identification, shelved so far, which must be faced; it is presented by the female head4 in an Attic or occasionally Phrygian helmet (both decorated with a gryphon crest and side wings), which forms the obverse type of the denarius, quinarius and sestertius throughout the period from 211 to 138, remains the commonest obverse type of the denarius down to 100 and continues to occur sporadically thereafter.5 The problem is complicated by the existence of two very similar heads, the female head in an Attic helmet (decorated with a horse-hair crest) which forms the obverse type of the uncia of the Prow series of bronze (produced from 225 onwards) and die female head in a Phrygian helmet (decorated with a gryphon crest) which occurs in five series of cast bronze (nos. 19,21,24,27,41) and also forms the obverse type of an issue of ROMANO didrachms and of an issue of ROMA struck bronze (nos. 22/1, 26/4). All three heads in my view portray the same entity. here without total conviction; but in the coinage of Julia Domna, where Luna and Diana are explicitly identified, Luna bears a crescent on her head, Diana does not. For the different Luna and Diana types see Index of Types. 1 For a statue of Victory in a biga, presumably Republican, see Tacitus, Hist, i, 86; Plutarch, Otho 4. 2 See Polybius i, 1, 5-6 with commentary of F. W. Walbank; [Velleius] i, 6, 6 with C. P. Swain, CP 1940,2-3. Note also the appearance of the Dioscuri at the battle of Pydna, Cicero, ND iii, 11; Valerius Maximus i, 8,1; Floras i, 28 (ii, 12), 14. Their appearance in connection with the battle of Vercellae perhaps evoked no contemporary numismatic record (Florus i, 38 (iii, 3), 19-21; Pliny, NH vii, 86 with no. 335/ioa-b). • For gems compare A. Furtw&ngler, Beschreibung, nos. 1821 and 4876-7. 4 Pace G. Pansa, RIN 1911, 199, imitations on colonial coins provide no evidence for identification. 5 Earlier identifications are: not Roma-A. degli Abati-Olivieri-Giordani, Saggio Cortona 1743, 133 (the argument that the same head appears on Social War denarii is without weight; the seated figure of Roma was also taken over and re-interpreted as Italia); A. Parisotti, Archivio R. Soc. Rom. Stor. Pan. xi, 1888, 59 (the argument, 71-5, that the head is unlike that of the various seated figures of Roma is irrelevant; there is no reason why it should be); Minerva-J. Eckhel, DNV v, 84; T. Mionnet, Midailles romaines i, 74; C. Cavedoni, Saggio, 124 n. 1 (Cavedoni is non-committal in Ripostigli, 43 n. 28, and eventually accepts Roma, see below); H.Cohen, Description, 339; Baron d'Ailly, Recherches ii, 43; A. W. Hands, NCirc 1900, 3724; Roma - P. V. Aldini, Memorie Ace. Torino iii, 1841, 199; C. Cavedoni, RN 1857, 185; F. Kenner. Sitsungsberichte Akad. Wien 1857, 257; B. Borghesi, Oeuvres i, 146; Th. Mommsen, RMw, 287; E. Babelon, Description i, 39; H. A. Grueber, BMCRR i, 14 n. 2; E. J. Haeberlin, Corolla Numismatica, 135 (unsatisfactory; the arguments from the supposed r61e of Minerva at Rome are very hazardous); G. Wissowa, RuK, 340 n. 1; F. Richter in Roscher iv, 150; G. Calza, Dedalo 1926-27, 663; L. Cesano, Atti I Congr. Stud. Rom., 54-5; Roma 1928, 385; J. W. Crous, Corolla L.Curtius, 217; Bellona - H. Mattingly and E. S. G. Robinson, PBA 1932, 237-45 (a hypothesis to support their now abandoned chronology, see R. Thomsen, ERC ii, 158-60; there is no trace of Cappadocian Bellona at Rome before the first century (G. Wissowa, RuK, 348-9; K. Lane, RRg, 281; for an early representation of Bellona see ILLRP 55; Roma medio-repubblicana, Tav. vii); Rhome - A. Alfoldi, Urahnen, 1-8 (see below).
721
Types and legends The head on the uncia may readily be seen to be the same as the head on the denarius, etc.; the latter, of course, owes a great deal in style and conception to the former (see p. 9); in addition, however, side wings are occasionally added to the Attic helmet on the uncia (no. 97/78 = Pi. xvni, 2) and the Attic helmet is occasionally replaced on unciae contemporary with the earliest denarii by a Phrygian helmet like that on some denarii (no. 97/7b = Pi. xvni, 3). The iconography of the head on the uncia is too close to that of the head on the denarius for there to be any possibility that two different entities are represented. Similarly, I find it inconceivable that the female head in a Phrygian helmet which occurs in the pre-denarius coinage is not the same as that which occurs occasionally in the denarius coinage; the addition of side wings to the helmet hardly constitutes a significant difference. We seem to be faced with one basic type, created during the Pyrrhic War with a Phrygian helmet, then revived in 225 and given an Attic helmet, finally taken over for the new denarii, quinarii and sestertii inaugurated in 211 and modified yet again. This view of the early development of the type is at least partially confirmed by the fact that its later history is one of continual minor modifications.1 As a preliminary to identifying who or what is portrayed by the type, it must be made clear that the Phrygian helmet is primarily an artistic feature, without much significance.2 This is obviously so on the earnest denarii, quinarii and sestertii, where the Phrygian helmet occurs at random, presumably according to the whim of the die-cutters;3 similar whims are presumably responsible for the perpetuation of the Phrygian helmet as an occasional variant throughout the course of the Republican coinage.4 But even in the case of the female head in a Phrygian helmet which occurs in the pre-denarius coinage, where the Phrygian helmet is consistently used, no special significance should be attached to it. It certainly does not justify the identification of the head as that of Rhome, the Trojan slave-girl regarded by some ancient authors as the eponymous foundress of Rome.5 Neither evidence nor probability suggests that Rhome occupied a position of any importance in the beliefs of the Romans about their origins.8 Despite the existence of Hellanicus' story about Rhome (FG//4, fr. 84 = 840, fr. S,post 423 B.C.), endorsed 1
See Index of Types. One modification, the addition of side-feathers to the helmet, is particularly appropriate to Roma as the daughter of Mars (see Melinno, Hymn to Rome 1; Ovid, Tristia iii, 7, 52; Martial v, 19, 5; for the side-feathers see Vergil, Aen. vi, 779-80; Valerius Maximus i, 8, 65 B. Borghesi, Oeuvres i, 144; E. Maynial, MEFR 1904, 3). » Compare the Phrygian helmet of Pallas on some Greek coins, BMC Italy, Velia, nos. 70-85 and 318; BMC Sicily, Syracuse, nos. 198-9, 226-32 and 280-2. It seems to me just possible that the Phrygian helmet reflects an awareness of Trojan origins (known to Timaeus, Polybius xii, 4b, 1; see also Servius on Vergil, Aen. xi, 306 for the later Roman belief that the Trojans, per insidias oppressi, were never conquered and note that on no. 22 Roma in a Phrygian helmet is associated with Victory). For salutary scepticism see P. Wolters, Festschrift H. WSlfflin, 12-14. 8 NOS. 97/2, 98/3-4b, 102/2D-C. • Nos. 269/1, 282/1, 288/1, 464/3b. * So A. Alfoldi, Urahnen, 1-8; contra, C. J. Classen, Historia 1963, 452 with n. 32. • Note the absence of any evidence of a monument to Rhome, A. Lippold, Consules, 239-40 with n. 58.
722
Public types by Damastes (FGH 5, fr. 3 = 840, fr. 9, c. 400 B.C.),1 Greek authors of the fourth and third centuries reported a variety of contradictory and worthless aetiological stories to account for the existence and the name of the city of Rome. These stories involve not merely Rhome, but also Rhomus,2 Romulus3 and other more shadowy figures (Plutarch, Rom. 2). Roman authors do not mention Rhome at all. Fabius Pictor, who presumably knew whatever there was in the way of an official version, followed Diodes of Peparethus and regarded Romulus as the eponymous founder of Rome; Naevius and Ennius held the same view.* The hypothesis that by the end of the diird century the Romans had ceased to regard Rhome as dieir 'Stamm-mutter' 5 would only be acceptable if there were strong evidence for their having so regarded her earlier. The only evidence adduced by Alfoldi is that of the coin types and this evidence does not support his view. It can be demonstrated that by the late second century the female helmeted head on die obverse of the denarius was regarded as the head of the goddess Roma and that, on the coinage, die symbolism most closely associated with die head was throughout that of Diana. The most reasonable view is that from die moment of its first appearance in die pre-denarius coinage the female helmeted head under discussion represented Roma. The evidence for the identification of the head in the late second century derives from a gem and from die legends found beside die head on the coins. The design of the gem in question (cited in commentary to no. 292) is a copy of the female helmeted head portrayed on the obverse of the denarius of P. Nerva (no. 292) and it is accompanied by die legend AVE ROMA, clear evidence of the identification of the head by the engraver of die gem. The evidence of die legends found beside die female helmeted head on the coins is more complex, but in my view no less compelling. The legend ROMA (in full or as a monogram), having previously been on the reverse, appears beside the female helmeted head on the obverse6 on a long series of denarii from 136 to 108 or 107.1 believe that in all these cases it serves to identify die head. It occurs in this period beside only three other heads, a laureate female 1
Cf. Callias, FGH 564, fr. 5 = 840, fr. 14; Agathocles, FGH 472, fr. 5 = 840, frr. 18-19; Galitas, FGH 818, fr. 1; Clinias, FGH 819, fr. 1; Heraclides Letnbos, FGH 840, frr. 13b and 4od, cf. Aristotle, frr. 13a and 13c. 1 Alcimus, FGH 560, fr. 4 = 840, fr. 12; Dionysius, FGH 840, frr. 10-11; earlier writers cited by Agathocles, FGH 472, fr. 5 = 840, frr. 18-19; Xenagoras, FGH 240, fr. 29 = 840, fr. 17; Cephalon, FGH 45, frr. 8-io = 840, fr. 21, cf. fr. 40b; etc. * Eratosthenes, FGH 241, fr. 45 = 840, fr. 20, cf. Alcimus, FGH 560, fr. 4 = 840, fr. 12. * Note also the inscription mentioned by N. Kondoleon, Praktika 1953, 271. * A. Alfoldi, Urahnen, 12-13. ' Of C. Serveilius M.f. (no. 239), C. Augurinus (no. 242), C. Numitorius (no. 246), T. Cloulius (no. 260), M. Metellus Q.f. (no. 263), C. Serveilius (no. 264), Q. Maximus (no. 265), C. Metellus (no. 269), Mn. Acilius Balbus (no. 271), Q. Fabius Labeo (no. 273), M. Fannius Cf. (no. 275), M. Tullius (no. 280), M. Aurelius Scaurus (no. 282/1), M. Calidius, etc. (no. 284), Cn. Domitius (no. 285/1), M. Sergius Silus (no. 286), P. Nerva (no. 292), L. Torquatus (no. 29s), T. Deidius (no. 294), P. Laeca (no. 302), L. Flaminius Cilo (no. 304). Compare M. Thompson, New style silver coinage, nos. 1110-30, BMC Cyrenaica, ccxi, and the Gortyn tetradrachm of Q. Metellus .Creticus (see on no. 262).
723
Types and legends head wearing a diadem (on the denarii of Mn. Aemilius Lepidus, no. 291), a helmeted head of indeterminate sex (on the denarii of Q. Lutatius Cerco, no. 305) and the head of Philip V of Macedon (on the denarii of L. Philippus, no. 293). There is no objection to regarding the first two heads as representing the same deity as does the helmeted female head, in a slightly different guise. The presence of die legend ROMA beside the head of Philip V of Macedon is less surprising than appears at first sight. The letter O is there to identify the head (see commentary on no. 293) and the legend ROMA is to be regarded as an irrelevant element of design taken over from the other moneyers of the same year (nos. 292 and 294-5), o n whose coins it does serve to identify the head of Roma. The period from 137 to 109 or 108 is one in which legends were undoubtedly used on the coinage in order to identify the figures represented, FOSTLVS on the denarii of Sex. Pompeius, QVIRIN(ALIS) on those of N. Fabius Pictor, ROMA on those of M. Fourius Philus,
Saturn (L. Memmius Gal., no. 313), Hercules (Lentulus Marcelli f., no. 329), Apollo and Diana (A. Albinus S.f., no. 335), Silenus (D. Silanus L.f., no. 337), Apollo (L. Piso L.f. L.n. Frugi, no. 340), Apollo (M. Metellus Q.f., C. Serveilius and Q. Maximus, nos. 369-71). 1 It does occur beside a female head wearing a diadem, probably Roma, on denarii of M. Cato (no. 343). ' So already Th. Mommsen, RMw, 452. 4 The date cannot conceivably be as late as c. 200, contra H. Mattingly and E. S. G. Robinson, PBA 1932, 246 n. 2.
724
Private types a seated figure, identified by the legend "Pcopio. The seated figure is certainly not Rhome;1 she can hardly be other than a personification of Rome, which later developed into the goddess Roma.2 The association with Roma of the symbolism of Diana is curious. It is clearest on the bronze half-piece of the Apollo/Horse ROMA bronze (no. 26/4); a head of Roma forms the obverse type, the reverse type is a dog, normally die animal of Diana.3 The crescent above the head of Roma on the denarii of P. Nerva (no. 292/1) also recalls Diana. It is also worth remarking that the head of Roma first appears on a semis associated with an as portraying Diana's brother Apollo and that on a late uncia (no. 285/7) r he head of Roma is replaced, by way of artistic variation, by a head of Apollo. The conclusion is thus that, in spite of borrowings from the iconography of Pallas (see p. 722 n. 2), the Romans throughout regarded Roma as having close affinities widi Diana.4 But the female helmeted head which I regard as that of Roma cannot be identified as that of Diana; it is not Diana in the late Republic and there is no reason to regard it as Diana in the earlier period. II
PRIVATE TYPES
Two issues of the didrachm coinage were distinguished by the addition of a symbol or letter to identify the mints at which they were struck.5 With the institution of the denarius coinage monetary magistrates began to use symbols, letters or abbreviated versions of their names to identify the issues for which they were responsible. The practice apparently began at mints outside Rome, doubtless as a haphazard development from the use of a mint-mark,6 and then spread to the mint of Rome itself, perhaps as a convenient means of imposing a check on a moneyer's honesty (see p. 602). The application of the idea was in the early years random, since part of an issue might be signed, part remain anonymous; but by about 170 almost every issue was signed in its entirety with a moneyer's symbol or name, standing on the coins beside the legend ROMA and the types of the Republic. 1
Contra A. Alfflldi, Urahnen, 12; cf. S. Weinstock, JRS 1959, 170. Note the imperial dedication of the Locrians to Roma Aeterna, CIL x, 16. * U. Knoche, Gymnasium 1952, 324 = Vom Selbstverstdndnis der Rtimer, 145, remarks that in Latin the word 'Roma' is not used to express this concept, but rather 'res publica' or 'patria' (Ennius, var. 6-8 V is exceptional); it perhaps follows that the artists who placed Roma on the coinage of the Roman Republic and labelled her with the legend ROMA were expressing a Roman concept in their own way (note that signum ret publicae at Suetonius, Aug. 94 is expressed as EIKCOV 'Putins at Dio xlv, 2,3). For the cult of the goddess Roma in the second century see Plutarch, Flam. 16 (190 B.C.); Tacitus ^nn.iv,56(i95B.C.);Livyxliii, 6, 5 (170B.C.); G. Wissowa, RuK, 338; K. Latte.i?^, 312; D. Magie, Roman rule, 1613; 1653 (Index); J. & L. Robert, B. Epig. 1950,68; Ch. Habicht, MDAI(A) 1957,243; J. A. O. Larsen, Melanges Piganiol iii, 1636. There is no evidence to support the view of H. Hommel, Die Antike 1942, 138 that Roma was a city goddess. * So H. Mattingly, Die Welt ah Geschichte 1938, 317; the rest of the article is best forgotten. * With the helmeted Roma compare representations of Artemis as a warrior, DS i, 147; P. R. Franke, AA, 1963, 450. * Nos. 40 and 42-3; the corn-ear indicates a Sicilian mint (cf. Hyginus 274,19 for Ceres' discovery of corn in Sicily), I Luceria. * Note the progression from a corn-ear on no. 72 and adolabella on no. 73 to the legend C • W. on no. 74.
725
Types and legends There is little to be gained from considering the symbols which are apparendy substitutes for the names of monetary magistrates on die early issues of die denarius coinage; some may be personal symbols, perhaps chosen to represent a name like Scipio or a tutelary deity, whether or not diat of die moneyer's origo; but it is hard to see how Victory can be regarded as a personal symbol and many symbols may have been chosen entirely at random.1 There is in any case no a priori reason to expect continuity in the use of symbols widiin a family; diere was such continuity at Capua,2 there was none at Adiens.3 From the idea of issues for which diey were responsible die moneyers seem gradually to have moved to the idea of issues diat were theirs. The corollary was complete freedom in die choice of types and legends; it is notorious diat in die end a Republican denarius could bear bodi types and legends neidier of which were distinctively Roman, striking testimony bodi of die dissolution of die Republic and of the fact that at die same time die power of Rome was so great diat her coinage no longer needed to be identified. Unfortunately, although diere are occasional literary references to die coin types of die Republic, we have no means of knowing what impact diey made on die people who saw diem; we may suspect diat diey were barely noticed.4 Nonetheless they remain valuable evidence for the knowledge, interests and attitudes of the men who were responsible for diem; for aldiough the artists involved seem to have been able to influence die nature of die designs finally adopted (see p. 745), the evidence presented below makes it clear diat die ultimate responsibility lay with die monetary magistrates. As far as our own understanding is concerned, die types and legends of die moneyers, no less dian die types which diey superseded, may be obscure or equivocal; diey may in addition be subdy tendentious. Enough is known to determine die proper approach to interpretation; but it must be remembered diat for any particular coin die interpretation may be very different depending on die date assigned to it and diat therefore die date of a coin must always be determined as closely as possible on external grounds before interpretation is attempted. Even dien diere may always be cases where it is better to admit ignorance. The temptation to read too much into a coin type is strong precisely because its small scale tends to make it inexplicit; nothing is achieved by yielding to die temptation. The first slight traces of distinctive coin types occur on die bronze coinage; L. Mamilius added to die regular prow reverse type a figure of Ulysses, alluding 1
Symbols used as control-marks (see p. 584 and nos. 384 and 412) were of course chosen entirely at random, contra A. Alfeldi, SM 1954, 28-30. 1 For heraldic emblems of gentes and groups of gentes at Capua, Heraclea, etc., see R. S. Conway Italic dialects i, 104-7; t n e Roman coin types which display formal parallels with the Capuan emblems are early, public types, not family or personal types. 3 L. Lacroix, Et. Arch. Class. 1955-56, 99. • So rightly H. Schaefer, RE viiiA, 2577-8. The belief of H. Gesche, JNG 1968, 30-1, in a 'war of types' between the Aemilii and the Marcii is neither substantiated nor even plausible; the view of Roman political practice which it involves is extremely bizarre.
726
Private types thereby to his Tusculan origin (no. 149), P. Sula placed on the prow stem a head of Venus, a tutelary deity later more prominently displayed by his grandson the Dictator (no. 205). Annius Rufus was the first who broke away from the traditional representations of the Dioscuri, Luna or Victory on the denarius and portrayed Jupiter in a quadriga (no. 221); other moneyers followed his example and a variety of gods and goddesses began to decorate the reverses and eventually the obverses of the silver coinage. From this time onwards an allusion to a moneyer's origo or the simple portrayal of a tutelary deity are perhaps the most consistent features in the typology of the Republican coinage. The simple choice of a god or goddess as a coin type continued to be made to die very end of the Republican coinage and the practice calls for some discussion. We know that some gentes had feriae peculiar to themselves, the Iulii, Aemilii, Claudii and Cornelii,1 and a moneyer's thoughts perhaps sometimes in choosing a coin type went automatically to a family god or goddess.2 Family reasons may explain both die representation of Hercules by M. Acilius (no. 255) and the sacrifice to Hercules of Mn. Acilius Glabrio, Cos. 191 ;3 the portrayal of Hercules and the Nemean Lion by C. Poblicius Q.f. (no. 380) is perhaps to be linked with an offering to Hercules by a Publicia L.f. ;4 and, most significant of all, Jupiter and the Capitoline triad are recurring themes on die coins of the gens Cornelia (see on no. 296). But more personal reasons undoubtedly also operated; all the great figures of the late Republic paid special attention to a particular deity or sometimes to several; dedications to diis deity or that and mass-produced seals with their representations show that the practice was characteristic of all levels of society. The choice of a god or goddess as a coin type could be no more than an extension of this common disposition. Caesar's seal bore Venus ?VOTTXOS (Dio xliii, 43,3), much of his coinage Venus Victrix; although earlier members of his family did not ignore her,5 Caesar's devotion to Venus was an almost entirely personal matter. The parallels between seals and coins are in fact very striking; apart from the sharing of divine motifs, they run parallel in a number of ways. A man's seal could bear die portrait of his ancestor6 or the representation of his own achievements;7 1
Macrobius, Sat. i, 16, 7. For gentes adopting one of Rome's gods or creating one of their own, see G. Wissowa, RuK, 33 nn. 3-4; 404 nn. 3-4; and, in general, 398-402; for private cults see J. Bayet, Hercule, 249-53; for the Fabii see Livy v, 46,1-3; Appian, Celt. 6 (the link between the Fabii and Hercules is an invention of the Augustan age, F. Mtlnzer, RE vi, 1740; add Plutarch, QR 272e-273b to the sources there cited). It is interesting that there is no trace of Sol on the coins of the Aurelii, despite the fact that they had a cult of Sol because he was believed to be their divine ancestor (S. Weinstock, JRS i960, 117 with n. 63). • Livy xxxvi, 30, 3; it is, however, true that Hercules had strong associations with the area where 4 Glabrio was operating, around Mt Oeta. ILLRP 126. 6 See nos. 258 and 320. These issues are the first to allude to divine ancestry. For the descent of the Iulii from Venus see S. Weinstock, Divus Iulius, 17. * Valerius Maximus iii, 5, 1; Cicero, in Cat. iii, 6 and 10. 7 Sulla's portrayed the surrender of Jugurtha, Pompey's three trophies, one for each of his victories (see on no. 426).
J
727
Types and legends it could even bear, like many coins, representations of more than obscure significance.1 More generally, a seal, like a coin type, could bear a man's badge or his slogan;2 it could also, like a coin type, be distinctive to the man who chose it or proclaim his association widi another.3 The coinage of the first century provides numerous examples of mcneyers celebrating the deeds of others (see below); the mass-produced gems with the portrait of Caesar were clearly produced for his supporters and, after 44, his avengers. Reference to a moneyer's origo is a consistent feature of the typology cf the coinage of the Republic to the end. Tusculum, ex quo sunt plurimae familiae consulares, home of many consular families (Cicero, Plane. 19), Lanuvium, Aricia, Lavinium, Praeneste, all these figure on the coinage of the Republic;4 allusions to other municipia almost certainly are diere unrecognised. Two events gave an added impetus to the developing tendency of die moneyers to regard their issues as theirs to design as they pleased, the bitter struggle within the oligarchy in 137 and the Lex Gabinia of 139 providing for a secret ballot in elections. The argument over the foedus Numantinum in the former year produced two of die most dramatic coin types ever used during the Republic, including the first obverse type for the denarius which was not die head of Roma (see on nos. 234 and 235), surely intended to play a part in die controversy. Once die possibilities had been seen, die consequences of die Lex Gabinia provided a consistent inducement to potential contestants for office to use the coinage for self-advertisement; die end of voting by show of hands meant the end of easy control by noble candidates of supporters; use of the coinage was an obvious way in which men could attempt to bring their claims to public notice.5 Certainly the list of moneyers for die ten years or so after 137 reads, in a way diat is true of no other period, like a roll-call of the nobilitas. Two features of the coinage of diese men stand out in particular.6 The first is the dominance of diemes relating to imperium or victory. Of the diirty-six silver issues which fall between 136 and 124, eight display Jupiter; of these two show him widi a branch, presumably laurel, in his hand, one shows him in a chariot driven by Victory; two furdier issues show a branch, presumably laurel, in the hands of other deities in chariots, ten further issues adopt Victory for part or all of die reverse type of the denarius; three other issues display a trophy, one odier a wreath. It would be difficult to diink of a more 1
The ancestral seal of the Emperor Galba bore a dog looking out from a ship's prow, Dio li, 3.5* M.-L. Vollenweider, Museum Helveticum 1955, 107-9, citing Caesar's seal. * M.-L. Vollenweider, 106-7, cf. 97-8; for the choice of a gem as the expression of an outlook, see also M. Henig, Britannia 1970, 249. * Tusculum - nos. 149, 290, 307, 353, 405, 463, 515; Lanuvium - nos. 316, 379, 384, 412, 472, 480, 509; Aricia - nos. 405, 486; Lavinium - nos. 312 and 455; Praeneste - no. 405. 6 T. P. Wiseman, New men, 148-9; cf. pp. 710-11 above. 6 The chariots of bizarre animals which appear in this period are presumably no more than the expression of an artistic fashion.
728
Private types striking illustration of the Roman belief in the connection between military virtus and suitability for office.1 The other remarkable fact is the relatively advanced age at which some moneyers in this period held the office - within ten years of their consulates (see pp. 710-11). It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the moneyership was in the case of such men a substitute for an aedileship; self-advertisement was a feature of both offices.2 The surmise is perhaps confirmed by the occurrence of what may be called 'aedilician' types, referring to games in the circus and to corn-distributions, as in the coinage of Cn. Domitius (no. 261), or only to corn-distributions, as in that of T. Cloulius (no. 260). It is almost as if the moneyers concerned placed on their coins an indication of what they would have provided if they had been elected Aediles.3 The use of die coinage of die Republic for die self-advertisement of individuals did not go entirely unchecked, however. After 124 there was a sudden reversion to public types. Between die issue of C. Cato (no. 274) and those of Cn. Domitius, Q. Curtius and M. Silanus (no. 285) we have the Dioscuri twice,4 die last appearance of die type with which the denarius coinage began, Victory revived five times, Jupiter five times,5 by now too common a type to say very much about a particular moneyer. In addition, M. Fourius Philus (no. 281), a man who might be expected to have private glories to celebrate, strikes a denarius which portrays die first full-figure Roma to appear on the coinage of the Republic,6 in order to commemorate a Roman victory. And even after M. Silanus (no. 285/2) and M. Sergius Silus (no. 286) had begun die move back to personal types, one moneyer not only devoted die reverse of his denarius (no. 287) to a scene of Roma observing die she-wolf suckling Romulus and Remus, but was so determined not to allow himself to obtrude in any way that he did not even place his name on the issue. The abandonment of private types for almost ten years can only, I think, be explained in terms of a lex de ambitu or a senatus consultutn or at least censorial action in 125-124, attempting to regulate the choice of coin types. Three striking developments follow die reappearance in 115 of personal types among the types of die Republican coinage, the increasing stridency apparent in the advertisement of gens and familia, the adoption of motifs with Eastern associations and the celebration by moneyers of a contemporary in no way related to them. Allusions to ancestors in the period down to 124 had often been indirect, as on die 1
Note also the types of C. Malleolus, no. 335/3. On the importance of the aedileship as a step to the consulship, see M. Gelzer, Nolility, 111. * Compare the issues of C. Serveilius (no. 264/2 and 4b - lion and corn-ears), Ti. Q. (no. 297 - desultor), T. Deidius (no. 294 - gladiatorial combat), L. Valerius Flaccus (no. 306 - corn-ear), L. Iulius (no. 323 - corn-ear), M. Volteius (no. 385 - games), L. Livineius Regulus (no. 494/29-30 - modius and wild-beast fight); note also the 'aedilician' types of the Curule Aediles, P. Fourius Crassipes (no. 356) and M. Plaetorius Cestianus (no. 409/2), and of the Plebeian Aediles, M. Fannius and L. Critonius (no. 351). -4 In the issue of C. Plutius (no. 278/2), two pilei appear as an additional symbol on the bronze coinage. * In the issue of Carbo (no. 279/2), a thunderbolt appears as an additional symbol on the bronze coinage. * Note the similarity to an Amazon; J. W. Crous argues entirely unconvincingly for an Alexandrian origin for the type, Corolla L. Curtius, 222-4.
2
729
Types and legends denarii of L. Postumius Albinus (no. 252), or achieved by the addition of a small symbol to the main type, as on the denarii with elephant's head (no. 262); as an example of this type of approach, the denarii of L. Torquarus (no. 295) widi die torque as a border stand almost alone in die period after 116. In succession to die denarii of the Augurini, C. Serveilius, N. Fabius Pictor (nos. 242,243,264 and 268), the artists at the mint produced a dazzling variety of representations of ancestral achievement or prowess,1 starting with the denarii of M. Sergius Silus (no. 286).2 Evidence appears of invention of ancestors, with the claim of L. Pomponius Molo to descent from Numa Pompilius (no. 334); and C. Fabius probably arrogated to himself descent from the Fabii Buteones (no. 322; cf. no. 415). A curious group of denarii, close in time to each other, give prominence to Sol and Luna, those of A. Manlius, Cn. Cornelius Sisena and Mn. Aquillius (nos. 309, 310 and 303). The denarius of Cetegus (no. 288) bears specifically Dionysiac motifs, diat of L. Memmius (no. 304) perhaps Egyptian motifs.3 And Venus, seen earlier on die coins of a Cornelius Sulla and a Iulius Caesar (nos. 205 and 258), reappears in die period after 116 on die denarii of L. Memmius and L. Iulius Caesar (nos. 313 and 320), suggestive of an interest in links widi Rome's Trojan origins. Most striking of all is the effect die career of Marius had on the coinage of moneyers in no way related to him; 4 certainty on whether or not the denarii of P. Nerva (no. 292) allude to him is unattainable; but the denarii of C. Fabius (no. 322) almost certainly reflect his career and he appears unmistakably as a triumphator on die denarii of one Quaestor, C. Fundanius (no. 326); his Gallic trophies figure on die same man's quinarii and on those of two more Quaestors, T. Cloulius and C. Egnatuleius (nos. 332 and 333) ;8 die denarii of Lentulus Marcelli f. (no. 329) celebrate die salvation of Rome;6 and in addition the years 101-100 are marked by a great outburst of victory coinage, widi die issues of L. Iulius, M. Lucilius Rufus and P. Servilius Rullus (nos. 323, 324 and 328).' Only two decades earlier Roma Victrix had 1
For the importance of ancestral exempla to the Romans, see Polybius vi, 53-5, with commentary of F. W. Walbank; Cicero, de re p. vi, 10-29. • Note the denarii of Mn. Aemilius Lepidus (no. 291), L. Philippus (no. 293), P. Laeca (no. 301), Q. Lutatius Cerco (no. 305), L. Valerius Flaccus (no. 306), M. Herennius (no. 308), L. Cota (no. 314), Q. Thermus M.f. (no. 319), L. Cassius Caeicianus (no. 321), L. Pomponius Molo (no. 334), A. Albinus S.f. (no. 335/9-10). H. le Bonniec, Cires, 370-8, argues that Ceres, on the denarii of L. Cassius Caeicianus and elsewhere, is a type which lays claim to the sympathy of the people; I am not convinced of this. 9 For Sol in an earlier period see the denarii of M. Aburius Geminus, no. 250.1 doubt if the presence of Sol on the denarii of Mn. Aquillius can be explained in terms of the defeat of Aristonicus, ruler of the Kingdom of the Sun, by the father of the moneyer. For the assimilation of Sol and Liber in the Imperial period see A. Bruhl, Liber pater, 264-7. 4 Largely missed by T. F. Carney, NC 1959, 79. • Ordinary trophies figure on the quinarii of P. Sabinus (no. 331). • For Marius as saviour see C. J. Classen, Gymnasium 1963, 327-8; for Marius as new founder of Rome see Plutarch, Marius 27. 7 The issue of L. Sentius (no. 325), with its reverse type of Jupiter in quadriga, should perhaps be included in this list; for Marius and victory see S. Weinstock, RE viiiA, 2513 (though the Victory on a column which appears on denarii of L. Censorinus is not a monument of Marius, see on no. 363); J.-Cl. Richard, MEFR 1965, 69.
730
Private types formed the principal type of the denarii of M. Fourius Philus (no. 281); with Marius Victory became the goddess of successful generals,1 Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, and through them the prerogative of the Roman Emperors.2 The Social War and Sulla After a period of relatively sparse coinage in die 90s, the 80s saw production on a scale hitherto unknown. At the same time, reference on the coinage to contemporary events became regular and die coinage was used for the first time by Romans striking widiout audiority. Widi die issues of die Italians in die Social War3 as a precedent, Sulla and his supporters struck to finance their rebellion. Roman hopes of victory in die Social War and dieir achievement are reflected in die issues of C. Vibius Pansa (no. 342), L. Titurius Sabinus (no. 344) and Cn. Lentulus (no. 345), die hopes of die government in die war against die Marians in 87 in die coinage of L. Rubrius Dossenus (no. 348). It has also been argued diat die head of Apollo on die coinage in diis period is a popularis symbol;4 attractive diough die idea is, I do not diink it can stand. The type first appears in 97 on die obverse of die last of die issues of quinarii struck for Marius (see above) and is dien used by L. Pomponius Molo as a family type (no. 334); in die following issue it is used by C. Malleolus for reasons diat are unclear, by A. Albinus as a family type and by a joint issue of die whole college of moneyers (no. 335/2,10 and 1). Now C. Egnatuleius, who uses die head of Apollo for his quinarii, may perhaps be regarded as a Marian, since he strikes for Marius, diough die inference is not a necessary one; but diere is no reason to regard C. Malleolus as a Marian.5 A list of die issues of die 80s bearing die head of Apollo likewise fails to provide convincing evidence of popularis associations for die type.6 L. Piso Frugi, no. 340 - family type C. Vibius Pansa, no. 342 C. Censorinus, no. 346 - family type Gargonius, Ogulnius, Vergilius, no. 350A Mn. Fonteius, no. 353 C. Licinius Macer, no. 354 P. Crepusius, no. 361 L. Censorinus, no. 363 - family type (suggested by reverse type) Anonymous issue, no. 373 Restored issue, nos. 369-71 1
For the gold issue of T. Quinctius see on no. 548. For the continuity of the theme see S. Weinstock, RE viiiA, 2488-9; 2513-14. 3 For this coinage see M. H. Crawford in Historia Numorum i3, forthcoming. There is nothing to the point for this period in R. J. Rowland, TAP A 1966, 407-19, blissfully unaware of the need to distinguish between types regular for a particular denomination, whoever the moneyer, and types distinctive to an individual moneyer. « T. J. Luce, AJA 1968, 25-39. * Contra T. J. Luce, AJA 1968, 30-1. ' The head on the obverse of the denarius of L. Iulius Bursio (no. 352/1) is not that of Apollo.
1
731
Types and legends Too little is known of nos. 342, 350, 353, 354 and 361 as a group to generalise about their coin types; and no. 373 is a mere copy of parts of earlier issues,1 without independent evidential value. But nos. 369-71 are Sullan and may perhaps provide a clue to the understanding of the head of Apollo as a coin type in this period. It is clear that in the Triumviral period Apollo and libertas are closely associated (see p. 741); it is also known that Sulla claimed to be a champion of libertas (see commentary on nos. 369-71); it is consequently possible that the head of Apollo was used as a coin type in the 80s to proclaim an attachment to libertas, interpreted, of course, to suit the tastes of the individual. The first issue of Sulla,2 produced in 83, associated Venus Victrix with an assertion of his achievements and his rights (no. 359; for Sulla and victory see also Plutarch, Sull. 6; Mar. 32) ;3 the issues of his enemies, which were also concerned with victory, concentrated more on Jupiter, with the issue of C. Norbanus portraying the symbols ofimperium and felicitas, and those of Laterensis and Q. Antonius Balbus portraying Jupiter in association widi Victory or the trappings of victory (nos. 357,358 and 364).* But the most interesting issue of the period is the second issue of Sulla, produced in 82 (no. 367). The reverse type, straightforwardly enough, alludes to the expected triumph of Sulla (note die presence of Victory and of a caduceus in anticipation of the title Felix); but the titulature, L. SVLLA IMPE., is less assertive daan that of the first issue of Sulla, IMPER.ITERVM, an interesting development; and the obverse type, the head of Roma, used on the early denarius coinage and thereafter with decreasing frequency (most recently in 91), is intended, I think, to proclaim an identification of Sulla's cause with that of the res publica; it is remarkable in this connection that the issue of Sufenas which refers to the Ludi Victoriae of Sulla (no. 421) also portrays Roma and it is presumably no accident that the restored issue of Sulla (nos. 369-71) harks back to the res publica of the second century. It is difficult not to see in all this traces of a new, individualistic attitude towards the res publica, an attitude which is incompatible with the collective ideology of oligarchic rule and which eventually finds expression in autocracy.5 By contrast with Marius, however, the dominant position of Sulla is only sporadically reflected in the coinage of moneyers striking within his own lifetime. Of the moneyers of 81 and 80, only one is perhaps to be linked with Sulla; C. Poblicius (no. 380) shares an obverse type, the head of Roma, with the Quaestor A. Manlius (no. 381), who strikes a commemorative issue in gold portraying the equestrian statue of 1 2 3 4
5
The obverse of no. 340/2 and the reverse of no. 331/1. The Sullan coinage is totally misunderstood by J.-C. Richard, MEFR 1963, 311-13. The reverse type is picked up by Q. Caecilius Metellus (no. 374); note the appearance of Victory on the issues of C. Valerius Flaccus and C. Annius (nos. 365-6). An enigmatic type of Cupid with thunderbolt appears in the issue of L. Iulius Bursio (no. 352/2); the obverse type of the denarius of C. Norbanus (no. 357) is a head of Venus, whether Victrix or not is unclear. See also p. 737 on the types of the moneyers of 49-45.
732
Private types Sulla. The types of the coinage of 79 include a probable Venus Victrix on the denarii of C. Naevius Balbus (no. 382).1 Thereafter, with die Dictator's death, nothing till the revival of Sullan types in the 60s and 50s. The age of Pompey2 Away from Rome for much of the 70s and 60s, Pompey only comes to be a major influence on die types of the coinage of die Republic in die period immediately before the outbreak of die First Civil War. The coinage of die earlier period reflects for the most part odier concerns, insofar as it does not portray diemes already familiar from die coinage of die second century. Tutelary deities, allusions to die origo of a moneyer, ancestral achievements, all figure on die coinage of diis period; moneyers widi nodiing better to advertise draw attention to dieir cognomina by die types diey choose, as, for instance, Q. Pomponius Musa (no. 410), with his beautiful denarii showing Hercules Musarum and die nine Muses. Two issues, remarkable for dieir artistic inventiveness, perhaps reflect a popularis concern widi libertas, diose of C. Egnatius Maxsumus and L. Farsuleius Mensor (nos. 391 and 392); the cognomen of the latter, recalling die mechanics of land distribution, is, however, the only tenuous clue which suggests diat libertas is not here an optimate slogan; but if die proposed interpretation is correct, we may perhaps also see reflected in die issue of L. Farsuleius Mensor a concern for die reconciliation of old and new Roman citizens, die latter still only imperfecdy assimilated a decade or more after the end of die Social War. At about die same time, two issues can be confidendy regarded as using die Genius populi Romani to advertise the justice of die war against Sertorius, those of Cn. Lentulus and P. Lentulus (nos. 393 and 397). But the types of die gold issue probably struck for the triumph of Pompey in 71 (no. 402) seem deliberately to avoid referring to die victory over Sertorius, doubdess in the interests of reconciliation.3 At about die same time the issue of Kalenus and Cordus (no. 403) portrays die reconciliation of Rome and Italy. Apart from an uncertain reference to Venus Victrix in the issue of M. Lepidus, the future Triumvir (no. 419), the coinage of the 60s is on die whole unremarkable; 1 1
3
The denarii of Ti. Claudius (no. 383) associate Diana and Victory; for Sulla and Diana see on no. 426. For the propaganda of this period note especially O. Murray, JRS 1965, 173-82 (the advocacy by Philodemus, perhaps in 59, of moderation and concord to the men at the centre of the Roman oligarchy) and F. Coarelli, MEFR 1969,160 (the placing by Q. Scipio Nasica, Cos. 52, on the Capitol of the statue of P. Scipio Nasica, Cos. 138, to recall the action of the oligarchy against Ti. Gracchus). The work of A. Alfoldi on this period seems to me unsatisfactory. There is no evidence whatever for propaganda for Pompey as a novus Romulus (for the supposed numismatic evidence see on nos. 405 and 426; for the consistently hostile Roman view of Romulus from Sulla to the end of the Republic see C. J. Classen, Philologus 1962,183-6; cf. Historia 1965, 385); the paper in Essays Mattingly, 63, obsessed with supposed prophecies of a Golden Age and full of surprising and undocumented assertions, is best ignored; for the views in SM 1954, 18 and 25 see p. 726 n. 1 (see Addenda). For the destruction by Pompey of letters to Sertorius from members of the Roman oligarchy see M. Gelzer, Pompeius, 52.
733
Types and legends towards the close of the decade the heads of Concordia and of Bonus Eventus appear on the denarii of Paullus Lepidus and Libo (nos. 415-17), perhaps alluding to the policy of Cicero in 63 and its successful outcome. But at tlie beginning of the next decade die memory of Sulla is dramatically revived by the issue of Sufenas (no. 421) recalling the foundation of the Ludi Victoriae of Sulla; Sullan themes are picked up by his son, Faustus Sulla ("no. 426), by P. Crassus, the son of a close supporter (no. 430), and by his grandson, Q. Pompeius Rufus (no. 434), the last also responsible for the beginning of portraiture on the Roman coinage. Contemporary with these issues is a great series of issues celebrating the achievements and the power of Pompey. Aldiough primarily recording his own role in the Eastern wars of Pompey, M. Scaurus (no. 422) cannot help reminding whoever sees his denarii of his commander;1 even Faustus Sulla (no. 426) devotes half his issue to Pompeian themes, among diem Venus; he also had been a lieutenant of Pompey in die Eastern wars and he was later to be Pompey's son-in-law (Suetonius, Caes. 27). The example of Scaurus and Sulla was followed by die more obscure C. Considius Nonianus (no. 424; his obverse figured Venus), A. Plautius (no. 431) and L. Vinicius (no. 436).2 But the domination of Pompey was not unchallenged on the coinage; die Ciceronian programme of consensus omnium bonorum is perhaps reflected in the types of P. Fonteius Capito (no. 429); Q. Cassius (no. 428) and Brutus (no. 433) recall die devotion to libertas and Republican principles of their ancestors; die issue of Messala (no. 435) explicidy records die failure in 53 of the plans to make Pompey Dictator. That issue was followed by die issue of L. Vinicius (no. 436), perhaps expressing not only Pompeian sympathies, but also hope for the reconciliation of Pompey and Caesar. Then after a brief interval, in which nodiing but traditional types recording ancestral achievement appeared on the coinage, diere was struck die last issue to be produced at the mint of Rome by a moneyer of Pompeian sympadiies, Q. Sicinius (no. 440). It bore die head of Fortuna populi Romani, with die symbols of victory on the reverse; it was the prelude to die Civil War. Ill
APPROACH TO EMPIRE
With the outbreak of hostilities between Caesar and Pompey, die control of the Senate over the coinage effectively disappeared. Neither side in the First Civil War hesitated to strike as interest dictated and it is significant that special issues by senatus consultum dried up in this period. But no-one yet took the extreme step of placing his head on die coinage; the empty privilege of conferring on Caesar the 1 J
Compare the celebration by C. Memmius (no. 427) of the achievements of a living relative. K. Kraft, JNG 1968, 7-24, makes no new points in his discussion of the coinage celebrating Pompey; his attempt to add the issues of P. Crassus (no. 430), Cn. Plancius (no. 432) and Ser. Sulpicius (no. 438) to the list of issues involved must be regarded as unsuccessful.
734
Approach to Empire right to do so was still left to the Senate. And only with the death of Caesar was the final step taken in the transition from a republican to a dynastic coinage, decorated or perhaps disfigured by die heads, first of Antonius, then of the other leaders, Caesarians and Liberators alike, eventually even of Cleopatra. The First Civil War The coinage of Caesar himself is not particularly diverse. His first issue (no. 443) alludes on the obverse to his possession of the office of Pontifex Maximus;1 the significance of the reverse, portraying an elephant trampling a dragon, is more obscure, but I believe that it was intended to symbolise victory over evil.2 The second issue (no. 452) bears a female head wearing an oak-wreath or a female head wearing a veil on the obverse, a trophy on the reverse. Although it is perhaps not possible to name the first deity who appears on the obverse, the oak-wreadi recalls Caesar's policy of sparing the lives of citizens;3 the second deity is presumably Vesta, whose rites were in the care of die Pontifices;4 beside the Gallic trophy on the reverse appear, in different varieties of the issue, the axe or die culullus of a Pontifex or the andle as die attribute of a Salius.5 A small gold issue of 47 (no. 456) reproduces basically die same diemes as the first two issues of Caesar, combining the attributes of die pontificate and augurate with a laurel-wreath as an emblem of victory; only widi the denarius issue struck later in 47 for the campaign in Africa (no. 458) does Venus appear on die coinage of Caesar, associated with Aeneas carrying Anchises.6 But at this point innovation virtually 1
The importance of the office is well shown by the premature competition for it between Domitius, Scipio and Lentulus Spinther before Pharsalus (Caesar, BC iii, 83); for lulus as Pontifex Maximus see D. Hal. i, 70, 4; Diod. vii, 5, 8. For Caesar's titulature see p. 89 n. 1. * For the association of elephants with victory see Suetonius, Nero 2 (Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, Cos. 122); Licinianus 38-9Bonn; Pliny, NH viii, 4; Plutarch, Pomp. 14 (Pompeius); Suetonius, Caes. 37; Dio xliii, 22, 1 (Caesar), etc.; note also the association of elephants with Alexander, Athenaeus xv, 202a. For the symbolism as a whole compare the coins of Croton with the type of Hercules strangling two snakes (B. V. Head, HN2, 97; cf. Pliny, NH xxxv, 63). The aetiological speculations of antiquity which related the name Caesar (probably deriving from caedere, S. WeinstocV., JRS 1961, 212; cf. CIL i*, 2806) to the Berber word for elephant are unwisely taken seriously by A. Alfoldi, Antiquitas 4 iv, 9-18; his belief that the dragon symbolises Africa goes with his mistaken dating of the issue to 47-46 (see p. 89); for Caesar as a Punic name see Corp. Inscr. Sent. 336 with commentary. Caesar's armoured elephant of Polyaenus viii, 23, 5 has nothing to do with the type. 9 Caesar, BC i, 22, 3-6; for the battle of Pharsalus see Suetonius, Caes. 75, acie Pharsalica proclamavit, ut civibus parceretur; Plutarch, Caes. 48; Caesar, BC iii, 98, 2; note also the letter of C. Matius, [Cicero], Jam. xi, 28, 2, and the manifesto of Caesar in Cicero, ad An. ix, 7c, 1, with its emphasis on liberalitas and misericordia; compare the repugnance for crudelitas felt by Caesar, Ammianus Marcellinus xxix, 2, 18 (cited by R. Syme, Sallust, 119 n. 67); the problem of Caesar's sincerity, raised by Cicero, ad An. x, 4, 8 and M. Treu, Museum Helveticum 1948,197, seems to me unreal. For the oak-wreath and dementia see Pliny, NH xvi, 7. * G. Wissowa, RuK, 161; for the wreath see on nos. 418 and 419. * This is, as far as I know, the only evidence that Caesar was a Salius. ' For Venus Victrix as the watchword of Caesar at Pharsalus see Appian, BC ii, 281, 319 and 424; Dio xliii, 22,2; Servius on Vergil, Aen. vii, 637 (Venus Genetrix!); the types of this issue were doubtless chosen with the victory at Pharsalus in mind, but they were almost certainly not chosen by Caesar himself. The watchword for Thapsus was Felicitas ([Caesar], BAfr. 83,1; cf. ILS 6631) and Venus reappeared only for Munda (Appian, BC ii, 430); Caesar apparently felt constrained to invoke Venus
735
Types and legends ceases. The gold issue of A. Hirtius (no. 466) bears a female head wearing a veil, again presumably Vesta (as on no. 452), together with die attributes of the augurate and pontificate; a similar reverse is linked widi a head of Ceres in an issue of denarii of the same year (no. 467).1 Caesar's remaining issues (nos. 468 and 481-2) associate Venus, once accompanied by a lituus, widi a variety of trophies2 or with a laurelwreath. The gold issue of L. Munatius Plancus (no. 475) associates Victory with a peculiar type of jug, distinctive to himself.3 The types ofdie moneyers striking between 49 and 44 are much more dramatic dian diose of Caesar; although most have some family or personal types,4 die overwhelming impression is of types celebrating Caesar. In 4 8 / along widi die types of L. Hostilius Saserna (no. 448) and Albinus Bruti f. (no. 450) recalling Gallic victories, diere is a denarius of C. Vibius Pansa (no. 449/4) which is an almost exact visual equivalent of Caesar's claim to be freeing die Roman people from die oppression of a clique of oligarchs and a denarius of Albinus Bruti f. (no. 450/2) which seems to allude to Caesar's claim to be a paragon of moderation. Apart from Victory on die quinarius of A. Licinius Nerva (no. 454/3) and die ambiguous types of L. Plautius Plancus (no. 453), diere are no references to Caesar on die issues of die moneyers of 47. But from 46 onwards diere is almost nodiing else; Venus appears on die coins of Mn. Cordius Rufus (no. 463) and C. Considius Paetus (no. 465), Victory6 on diose of T. Carisius (no. 464), L. Papius Celsus (no. 472), Palicanus (no. 473) and L. Valerius Acisculus (no. 474), Triumphus on diose of L. Papius Celsus, Felicitas7 on diose of Palicanus; die cornucopiae, die emblem of Fortuna, appears alone on die sestertius of L. Valerius Acisculus, surmounting a globe on die sestertius of C. Considius Paetus; die last also perhaps portrays die curule chair voted to Caesar after die battle of Thapsus. The issues of 44 (no. 480), apart from a few types of L. Aemilius Buca and M. Mettius, are wholly devoted to most especially when confronted with Pompey or his sons (for Pompey's devotion to Venus see on no. 426; he feared the loss of her favour before Pharsalus, Plutarch, Pomp. 68). The head of Venus also appears as the obverse type of the issue of A. Allienus (no. 457), the reverse type of which reflects the fact that the issue was produced in Sicily (for Trinacrus = Thrinacus see Kruse, RE VIA, 607; for the triskeles see on no. 329). For gems with Aeneas and Anchises see M.-L. Vollenweider, Steinschneidekunst, 17 n. 6. 1 The alternating letters D and M on the reverse presumably stand for D(pnum) or D(onatwum) and M(unus) (B. Borghesi, CEuvres i, 235); for Ceres as the goddess of distributions to the people see on no. 351. The titulature of Caesar on this issue is odd; DICT. ITER. (October 48-October 47) does not fit with COS.TER (46); for the retention of a title after the period to which it strictly applied see the important discussion of H. A. Andersen, Cassius Dio, 23-5. 1 For the chariot which forms part of the trophy on no. 482 compare the chariot on no. 448/2; for the titulature CAESAR IMP. see on no. 480. 3 See no. 522 and p. 743. 4 The exceptions are L. Hostilius Saserna (no. 448), perhaps L. Plautius Plancus (no. 453), and C. Considius Paetus (no. 465). 6 The types of Mn. Acilius (no. 442) are ambiguous; as with L. Plautius Plancus, they may have a Caesarian reference or they may not. • For Caesar and Victory see S. Weinstock, RE viiiA, 2514-17; ILS 9349; CIL ix, 5904 (for a sacerdos Aug. victoriae Caesaris); note also the issue of C. Clovius (no. 476). ' For Felicitas as the battle-cry at Thapsus see BAfr. 83, 1; cf. ILS 6631.
736
Approach to Empire TABLE
Issue Deity Minerva1
LXi. Types ofmoneyers under Caesar
454
455
463
464
465
+1
+
+
.
+
Diana Apollo Sol Liber Mercury Jupiter Roma
472
474 .
+
+ +
1
Note also the issue of C. Clovius (no. 476), portraying Minerva in association with Victory; for the snake see on no. 491. * In association with Victory. * In association with Luna, see below n. 1. 4 In association with Pan. ' In association with Victory and with cornucopiae on globe.
Caesar, to his portrait, to Venus, to For tuna, to felicitas and victory; libertas and concordia are even celebrated too. But apart from all this, the coinage of the moneyers from 49 to 45 also provides evidence, I think, of a particular association between Caesar and the res publica, such as the coinage of Sulla and the Sullani also suggests (see p. 732). Beginning in 47, there is a sudden re-appearance of many of the gods of the Roman pantheon (see Table LXI). The rest of this coinage is occupied, first and foremost, with Caesar; surely the association of the two kinds of types is deliberate.1 The coinage of the Pompeians contrasts with that of Caesar in a number of ways; perhaps most strikingly, even when Pompeius was alive, his military coinage, unlike that of Caesar, was produced by a large number of lieutenants. Thus the Praetor C. Coponius, with the moneyer Q. Sicinius (no. 444), the Consuls L. Lentulus and C. Marcellus, with an anonymous Quaestor (no. 445),2 the Proquaestors Cn. Piso and Varro (nos. 446-7), all struck for Pompeius, in part with private or family types. Apollo (with a star to indicate his divinity) and the attributes of Hercules, perhaps Hercules Victor, appear on the denarii of C. Coponius and Q. Sicinius, a variety of types on those of L. Lentulus and C. Marcellus - Triskeles/Jupiter, Apollo/Jupiter 1
Note particularly Roma on the issue of T. Carisius (no. 464/3); a terracotta relief of about this period shows a figure sometimes called Roma in an attitude of submission to a figure who is perhaps Caesar (but see p. 739 n. 2 below); Sol and Luna on the issue of L. Valerius Acisculus (no. 474/5) perhaps reflect an awareness that the Ludi Saeculares (founded by P. Valerius Publicola) had been due in 46 (C. Cavedoni, Saggio, i88-9n.; contra, I. B. Pighi, De ludis saec, 7); for Caesar and the novum sacculum see S. Weinstock, Divus lulius, 193-6 (no real evidence). * The harpa on no. 445/ia, symbol of Saturn and hence of the aerarium, is succeeded on no. 445/2 by the letter Q; see p. 89.
737
Types and legends and altar (with a star to indicate his divinity), Jupiter/Artemis ofEphesus.* The constant element in this series of types is Jupiter, the supreme god of Rome; the triskeles is a family type of the Marcelli (see on no. 329) ; 2 Artemis ofEphesus on no. 445/3 seems to indicate the production in Asia of this part of the issue, Apollo on no. 445/2 perhaps indicates a mint at Apollonia for that part of the issue (see p. 89). Jupiter reappears on the denarii of Varro, associated with the symbols of domination terra tnarique,3 the denarii of Cn. Piso display Numa, the ancestor of the Calpurnii,4 and a prow. After the death of Pompeius, his followers gathered in Africa; Q. Metellus Scipio struck alone and with two different Legates fnos. 459-61),5 even M. Cato Uticensis finally abandoned his principles and struck in his own name (no. 462), albeit simply with the types of M. Cato, moneyer in 89 (no. 343). The sole issue of Metellus Scipio displays Jupiter and an elephant, badge of the Metelli (see on no. 262), his joint issues a succession of types whose central theme is anticipation of success; Jupiter (accompanied by eagle's head and sceptre) is associated with a curule chair, above which is the cornucopiae of Fortuna;6 a goddess wearing a mural crown (perhaps the city-goddess of Utica) is associated with a trophy, around which are disposed lituus and jug, to recall the augurate of Q. Metellus Numidicus,7 and caduceus, as emblem oifelicitasf the Genius terrae Africae and Victory with caduceus and patera appear together, as do Africa (with her symbols corn-ear and plough) and Hercules, who is perhaps, as on the issue of C. Coponius and Q. Sicinius, Hercules Victor.9 The coinage of Metellus Scipio is pathetically true to its author's belief in the felix et invictum Scipionum nomen (Suetonius, Caes. 59), overcome at Thapsus by the felicitas of Caesar. 1
The arguments against this identification by A. Alfoldi, SM 1958, 103, may be discounted. In the first place, the supposed dissimilarities between this coin type and certain representations of Artemis of Ephesus simply do not exist; neither the lion's head nor the snakes which AlfOldi sees are there at all, the lump on the right side of thefigureoccurs on only one die and is clearly aflawand not a lionskin; nor does it matter that the figure is not polymast (Ch. Picard, Ephese et Claros, 474 and 529). In the second place, it would have been gross carelessness on the part of the die engravers to produce something so like Artemis ofEphesus, but intended to be a tutelary deity of Africa; by contrast, Genius terrae Africae on no. 460/4 is distinctive and unmistakable. 1 For parallels to this artistically elaborate version of the motif, see J. Boardman, lonides Collection, no. 42, with earlier bibliography. * Compare the gem illustrated in F. Imhoof-Blumer and O. Keller, Tierbilder, pi. xx, 19; see also on no. 393. 4 Laus Pis. 3 and 15; Horace, AP 291-2; Plutarch, Numa 22; Festus, s.v. Calpurm. 8 The corn-ear on no. 460/1-2 and on no. 460/3, like Genius terrae Africae on no. 460/4, perhaps reflects the African origin of the issue. On the Genius terrae Africae see L. Carton, CRAI1918, 338; A. Merlin, Sanctuaire de Baal, 44; Pol. vii, 9, 2, with commentary of F. W. Walbank. * The dragon's head on the reverse of no. 460/1-2 perhaps picks up and implicitly rejects the hostile reference of the dragon's head on no. 443/1. 7 L. R. Taylor, AJA 1944, 352; B. Frier, Arethusa 1969, 189 n. 27 produces no adequate arguments for his opposing view. ' The uncertain rectangular object on no. 460/3 perhaps symbolises the earth over which, with the sea symbolised by the rostrum tridens, dominion is claimed. * Hercules is hardly a family type of Eppius, contra C. Cavedoni, Bullettino 1843, 6-
738
Approach to Empire With that defeat, the struggle passed to Pompeius' sons; Cn. Pompeius1 linked first a reverse type showing Hispania welcoming a Pompeian soldier with die head of Roma (no. 469), then a series of reverse types, portraying the relationship of die Spanish cities and die Pompeians,2 widi die head of Pompeius (no. 470); bodi issues bear also die symbols of victory or felicitas; after Munda die Pietas denarii of Sex. Pompeius (no. 477) mark die continuation of die feud;3 a tiny issue, die denarii were succeeded by a bronze issue struck by Sex. Pompeius and a Legate (no. 478) and by anodier bronze issue struck by Sex. Pompeius alone (no. 479);* dien suddenly silver bullion became available and Q. Nasidius struck a splendid issue, portraying Pompeius as Neptune on the obverse widi a sea-battle or a ship on die reverse (no. 483);* die star is perhaps a symbol of success (Festus, s.v. Stellam etc.). The Second Civil War6 The uneasy calm after die murder of Caesar on the Ides of March of 44 was reflected in die coinage; die moneyers of 44 portrayed Caesar as Parens Patriae, die projected temple of dementia Caesaris, die games at die Parilia, finally Antonius, then stopped striking altogether before half die year was up. The first moneyer of 43 to strike, L. Flaminius Chilo (no. 485), used unequivocally Caesarian types; it is impossible to say whedier he struck after Octavian's march on Rome or only after die formation of the Triumvirate, but in eidier case a large part of die year was widiout coinage;' and Chilo's colleagues used only harmless personal and family types. But meanwhile bodi Antonius and Octavian had begun to strike,8 bodi widi dieir own portraits, both seeking to link diemselves widi Caesar. Antonius' first issue bore his own portrait on one side, diat of die Dictator on die other (no. 488), die lituus widi die first and the jug widi die second serving to link Antonius' augurate widi Caesar's; Antonius' second issue, struck in part in association with Lepidus (no. 489), bears lituus, jug and raven9 in allusion to his own augurate and pontifical emblems in 1
The titulature is simply Cn. Magnus Imperator, sometimes withfiliusadded (for which compare no. 379), as T. V. Buttrey points out (MusN i960, 86-7); the same titulature appears on some sling builets (ILLRP 1104) and on the as of Cn. Pompeius (no. 471; J.-C. Richard, MEFR 1963, 334-5, oddly attributes significance to the head of Janus on this coin). 1 See M. Gelzer, Nobility, 95 n. 292 for Pompeian clientelae in Spain; the design of the types perhaps owes something to the Caesarian relief with Caesar and the Oikoumene, S. Weinstock, Divus Iulius, 47 and 50 n. 4. * For Pietas as the battle-cry at Munda see Appian, BC ii, 430; note that Pietas on the coins holds sceptre and palm-branch. The titulature is Sex. Magnus Imperator, Sex. Magnus Pius Imperator, Magnus Pius Imperator with or without filius added, cf. Cicero, Phil, xiii, 50; ILS 8891; no. 511; the discussion of T. V. Buttrey, NC i960, 90-3, is vitiated by his acceptance of an ancient forgery as genuine; M. Grant, FIT A, 408-10, on the praenomen imperatoris is nonsense. * The head of Janus has the features of Pompeius. * For Sex. Pompeius as the son of Neptune see Appian, BC v, 416; Dio xlviii, 19, 2; 31, 5; 48, 5; Horace, Epod. 9, 7-8; Pliny, NH ix, 55; de vir. ill. 84. ' For the literary evidence on the propaganda of this period see the survey of K. Scott, MAAR 1933, 7, concentrating mainly on that part of it which is vituperative. 7 If he is the Cillo who was one of the proscribed (see on no. 485), his Caesarian types did him no good. * Also C. Antonius, Procos. Des. of Macedonia, with the types Head of Macedonia (see on no. 432)/ Pontifical emblems. " For the raven see Gossen, RE iA, 21 and p'. 719 n. 5.
739
Types and legends allusion to Lepidus' tenure of the office of Pontifex Maximus, inherited from Caesar; the issue then turns to portraying Victory, as yet hoped for rather than achieved;1 both issues conclude with Antonius as Illvir. 2 Octavian's first issue bore his own portrait on one side, on the other side the statue erected in his honour in 43 3 or die portrait of Caesar, once widi a legend expressly describing him as Dictator (no. 490); the titulature of Octavian shifts from Imperator through Consul to Illvir. 4 After a last show of Senatorial independence, die Triumvirate was formally set up on 27 November 43; both Antonius and Octavian celebrated the event widi issues of portrait gold (nos. 492-3),* preparing the way for die portrait gold of die moneyers of 42 (no. 494); alongside it these produced also a diversity of odier types, almost all celebrating the establishment of die Triumvirate or its two more important individual members; his contemporaries passed on Lepidus the same verdict as historians since. Sol and Luna on die coinage of die moneyers of 42, perhaps alluding diere to the imminence of a new age,8 are picked up by Sol in the coinage of Antony of 42 (no. 496) ; 7 Mars, looking forward to die planned Parthian War, is similarly picked up in the coinage of Octavian of 42 (no. 497/3),8 which odierwise repeats die diemes of 1
A lion forms the reverse type of no. 489/5-6; for the association (unexplained by the texts) of Antonius and lions see Cicero, ad Att. x, 13,1; Pliny, NH viii, 55; Plutarch, Am. 9; the use of a lion to portray the claim of Antonius to descent from Hercules would be devious, to say the least, and it has been argued that Leo was the sign of the zodiac under which Antonius was born (H. Willers, NZ 1902, 83); perhaps more important is the fact that in the East the lion was associated not only with Antonius (Orac. Sibyll. xi, 200), but also with Alexander (see P. Osl. ii, 14, line 9(?); Orac. Sibyll. xi, 215). For lions on the coinage of Alexander and his successors see D. Michel, Alexander, 122-4 (wrongly believing that Antonius was conceived under Leo). Note also the gem published by M.-L. Vollenweider, Hommages Renard iii, pi. ccxliii, 3, and linked by her with the First Triumvirate, but surely to be linked with the Second; it portrays Jupiter riding on an eagle with a thunderbolt in his 1. hand; the eagle carries a caduceus and a rudder in its claws, emblems of felicitas and Fortuna, and flies above a bull (Octavian, see on no. 494/24), an ass (?Lepidus) and a lion; on either side are a laurel-branch and a palm-branch. 2 The initial title of Imperator was perhaps assumed without a salutation, see Cicero, Phil, xiii, 22. For Antonius' attempts to link himself with Caesar, note also the name of his son, Iullus Antonius, born in 43. 9 Velleius ii, 61, 3; the letters S.C on the coins relate to the erection of the statue, not to the production of the issue. • For Octavians' first salutation see Cicero, Phil, xiv, 11, 28, 37; Dio xlvi, 38,1; Ovid, Fasti iv, 673-6. 6 Lepidus struck only an issue of silver, with his own portrait and that of Octavian (no. 495). 8 The determination of A. Alfdldi, Hermes 1930, 369; Essays Mattingly, 63, to see a belief in the coming of a new age as the central theme of the propaganda of the end of the Republic is unsupported by the evidence; in particular, it is quite unproven that the group of gems which portrays sovereignty coming to a sleeping woman {Museum Heheiicum 1950, 6-7; for a third-century B.C. date see E. Strong, CAH ix, 823-4) refers via Rea Silvia to Romulus; sovereignty may come to a woman in her own right, see W. W. Tarn, JRS 1932, 142 (with the doubts of V. Nikiprowetsky, 144-6); nor does the interest of Varro in the horoscopes of Romulus and Rome (Cicero, de div. ii, 98; Plutarch, Rom. 12) provide any evidence for interest in the 'Wiederkehr des Idealkdnigs der Urzeit', contra Museum Helveticum 1951, 211-12. The unavoidable return of monarchy to Rome was in any case not evident at any rate to the Senators who killed Caesar (see Addenda). 7 The lituus marking Antonius' augurate is present on no. 496/2-3. For Sol see p. 743 n. 8; the remarks of S. L. Cesano, BAAR 1912, 231, on this issue are not to the point. • The letters S.C relate to the original decree by which Octavian gained command of an army, not to the production of the issue.
740
Approach to Empire the coinage of the previous year,1 substituting for Caesar's head his curule chair,2 still with a legend identifying him as Dictator. At the same time, the Liberators began to strike their own coinage (nos. 498-508), in preparation for the campaign of Philippi; 3 not unexpectedly, their coinage is dominated by the themes of libertas and Victory.4 Libertas herself,5 Apollo, or a tripod or other attributes of Apollo all convey an allusion to libertas;6 Victory herself, or a trophy or a laurel-wreath convey an expectation of success.7 Two victory types call for special comment. Part of one issue of Cassius (no. 505/1-3) records his capture of Rhodes after a battle at Myndus (Appian BC iv, 300-5; Dio xlvii, 33, 3), opposite the island of Cos ;8 the rose of Rhodes and the crab of Cos both figure, together with an aplustre as a symbol of victory. Part of an issue of Brutus shows Victory trampling on a broken sceptre and diadem (no. 507/2).9 But the coinage of Brutus also includes a type which may be regarded as the betrayal of the ideals of the Liberators, the portrait of Brutus; associated on one issue only with a trophy (no. 507/1), it is on two others associated, almost ironically, with the head of L. Brutus, the founder of die Republic (no. 506/1),10 and with the pileus and daggers (no. 508/3), which with the legend EID.MAR. commemorate the murder of the tyrant Caesar.11 I
The equestrian statue on no. 497/1 is the same as that on no. 490/1 and 3; for the letters S.C see above, p. 740 n. 3. The lituus in Octavian's hand reflects Octavian's acquisition of the augurate (first attested on no. 490/2); the importance of the augurate to Octavian is hopelessly over-emphasised by J. Gag£, MEFR 1930, 158-64; J. Bayet, Bull. Classe Leares Ac. Roy. Belgique 1955, 453; for a balanced view see H. Erkell, Augustus, 30-6. * For the r61e of Caesar's curule chair (on two occasions) in the propaganda of Octavian after the death of Caesar see Appian, B C iii, 105-7; Plutarch, Ant. 16; Cicero, ad Att. xv, 3, 2; Dio xlv, 6, 5; 7, 2; T. Rice Holmes, A rchitect i, 191; cf. Dio xliv, 6,3 for the original decree of the Senate about the chair. 3 The titulature of C. Cassius moves from Proconsul to Imperator, that of Brutus from the simple cognomen (on no. 500/6-7; cf. no. 433) to Q. Caepio Brutus Proconsul, Q. Caepio Brutus Imperator and M. Brutus Imperator. Two issues of Cassius include types honouring Brutus (nos. 500/6-7 and 505/4-5); on the first of these, perhaps struck when the two men met at Smyrna early in 42, Cassius is already Imperator, Brutus has no title at all; the latter's coinage as Proconsul should be regarded as beginning after this, since otherwise Cassius would surely have copied his titulature and not have used the cognomen only, as on the issue of Brutus as moneyer (no. 433); Brutus' coinage as Imperator presumably began before the two men met again at Sardis later in 42 (Plutarch, Brut. 34) and were acclaimed by the soldiers; this will have been Brutus' second salutation (Dio xlvii, 25,2), also Cassius' second. The types honouring Brutus in the second issue of Cassius, struck on this occasion (no. 505/4-5), include the title Imperator. 4 The Proquaestor L. Sestius displays the insignia of his office on no. 502/4 (A. Alfoldi, AJA 1959,10), the symbols of the augurate of Spinther appear on no. 500, those of the pontificate of Brutus on nos. 500/6-7, 502/1-2 and 4, and 508/1-2; naval symbols appear on nos. 506/3 and 507. 5 For Libertas as the battle-cry at Philippi see Dio xlvii, 42, 3 - 4 3 , 1 . * For Apollo and libertas see Servius on Vergil, Eel. viii, 75; Macrobius, Sat. i, 18, 1-6 and 8-9; Apollo is too dominant on the coinage of Brutus to be explained in terms of a devotion of Brutus to Apollo (for which Plutarch, Brut. 24 hardly provides evidence). Note also the presence of Artemis on no. 508/1-2. Apollo on the coinage of Cassius perhaps shows him to have been Xvir s.f. (B. Borghesi, CEuvres i, 341). ' For Brutus and victory see Dio xlvii, 40, 8; Appian, BC iv, 563; Plutarch, Brut. 39; Obsequens 70. 8 So rightly H. A. Grueber, BMCRR ii, 483 n. 2, against A. Alfoldi, MDAI(R) 1935, 146-7. * Compare the loosened diadem on no. 505/3 and Cassius' refusal of the title of potaiAeus (Plutarch, Brut. 30). 10 Note the oak-wreath which forms the border on both obverse and reverse. II For a record of the type see Plutarch, Brut. 40; Dio xlvii, 25; and compare A. Furtwangler, Antike Gemmen, pi. 47, 37. H. Mattingly, Antiquite Classique 1948, 445, is not helpful.
741
Types and legends After the debacle at Philippi, the coinage of the Republicans soon came to an end. Q. Cornuficius struck a small issue in Africa (no. 509), L. Status Murcus struck a small issue before joining Sex. Pompeius (no. 510); it bears Neptune on die obverse, a male figure raising a kneeling female figure (perhaps Roma) on die reverse, widi a trophy in die background; its diemes derive in part from die coinage of Brutus and Cassius, in part perhaps from die relief portraying Caesar widi die Oikoumene.1 The prolific gold and silver coinage of Sex. Pompeius (no. 511)2 belongs only to die years 42-40, Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus strikes one independent issue in 41 (no. 519), before his adhesion to Antonius. The last Republican issue is diat of the renegade Q. Labienus Pardiicus (no. 524). At die same time, die moneyers gradually ceased to function; a full college (nos. 512-15) struck in 41, diereafter only Ti. Sempronius Graccus and Q. Voconius Vitulus, in 40 or 39 (nos. 525-6); the types of die moneyers of 41 are on the whole family or personal types, with L. Servius Rufus apparendy still able to use a type conveying sympathy widi die cause of die Liberators; Graccus and Vitulus struck, in effect, as subordinates of Octavian, widi a harmless allusion to die cognomen of Vitulus as die only trace of die personal interests of die moneyers.3 Antonius struck two issues in 41, one in his own name (no. 516), one in die name of a series of Legates (no. 517) ;4 die first issue celebrates with the legend PIETAS COS. die consulship of his brodier L. Antonius Pietas,5 die reverse type changing from Fortuna to Pietas; die second issue alternates die portrait of Octavian with diat of L. Antonius; die portrait of Antonius forms die constant obverse type.6 A small issue of Octavian (no. 518) associates his portrait first widi an allusion (by means of a representation of die club of Hercules) to die Gaditane origin of his Legate Balbus and dien widi a representation of an equestrian statue erected to him under the Lex Rufrena.7 In 40, die two Triumvirs disappeared completely from each odier's coinage; Antonius struck one small issue by himself (no. 520), figuring the symbols of 1
Dio xliii, 14, 6; 21, 2 with S. Weinstock, Divus lulius, 46. Visually striking, the coinage is hackneyed in conception. The gold issue associates the portrait of Sex. Pompeius, surrounded by an oak-wreath as a border, on the obverse with the portraits of Cn. Pompeius Magnus and of his elder son on the reverse; lituus and tripod recall their offices of Augur and Xvir sacris faciundis. The silver issues portray Neptune (see above, p. 739 n. 5) and a naval trophy, Cn. Pompeius Magnus with jug and lituus and Neptune between the Catanaean brothers (symbols of pietas, see on no. 308), Neptune on the Pharos of Messana and Scylla. 3 Attention is here for the first time on the coinage drawn to the position of Octavian as the son of the deified Caesar; compare the slightly earlier sling bullet from Perusia with the legend DIVOM IVLIVM(7LLi?/>iii6). 4 Note their curious titulature-PROQP[ROPR] or QP[ROPR]. s So rightly H. Erkell, Augustus, 116-17; for the cognomen see Dio xlviii, 5, 4; Inscr. Hal. xiii, 1, p. 568; for the view that L. Antonius championed the power of the consulate, see R. Syme, RR, 208 n. 1. * A jug sometimes draws attention to the augurate of M. Antonius, a lituus to that of Octavian. ' ILS 73 (= ILLRP 409); 73a. 1
742
Approach to Empire felicitas and Fortuna placed over a globe,1 and one in the name of each of his subordinates Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus and L. Munatius Plancus (nos. 521-2); the prow on the former perhaps recalls the same naval victory as the prow on Ahenobarbus' issue in his own name the previous year (no. 519), the peculiar type of jug on the latter, occurring also on Plancus' gold issue under Caesar (no. 475), perhaps refers to his tenure of the office of Vllvir epulo.2 Apart from the issues of the moneyers Graccus and Vitulus, if they belong in this year, Octavian struck only a small issue in the name of his friend Q. Salvidienus Rufus.3 The reconciliation between Antonius and Octavian which took place at Brundisium late in 40 was marked by an ovatio and almost immediately reflected in their coinages; Antonius struck portrait issues of his newly-wedded wife Octavia4 and of her brother Octavian (nos. 527-8); Octavian struck an issue (no. 529)/ part of it associating the portraits of the two Triumvirs with the caduceus, here surely the symbol of concordia, part with the even more explicit types, Concordia/Two hands clasped round caduceus.6 But soon after the coinages of the two Triumvirs parted company for good; the coinage of Antonius of 38 continued to portray Octavia (no. 533 - note the emphasis on the tenure of Republican office); but all reference to the Triumvirate, other than in the titulature of Antonius, now disappeared. The year 38 was the last in which types showing real interest or inventiveness were struck for Antonius; two remarkable full-length figures, of Antonius as a general claiming dominion over the sea and of Antonius as Augur, were associated with a lion holding a sword7 and with Sol as reverse types.8 The later coinage of Antonius has nothing like this; a trophy to celebrate his third imperatorial salutation (no. 536),® a tiara and a portrait modelled on diat of Alexander to mark the Armenian 'victory' (no. 539 with p. 747 n. 5), the portrait of his son (no. 541), the portrait of Cleopatra wearing a diadem (no. 543).10 One issue devotes the reverse type merely to repeating the name of Antonius or 1
1 3 4
I do not think there is any reference to the marriage between Antonius and Octavia (as W. W. Tarn, JRS 1932,157); nor is there any reason to regard the type as Alexandrian (as H. Mobius, Alexandria und Rom, 30-1). ILS 886, where also the titulature IMP.ITER. appears, cf. ILLRP 431. For the reverse type compare the sling bullet, ILLRP 1113, for the titulature the sling bullet, ILLRP 1120.
Note also Antonius' issues of cistophori and gold of the next two years. It is remarkable that Antonius' Dionysiac predilections (J. Tondriau, Symbolae Osloenses 1949, 130-2; A. Bruhl, Liber pater, 12732; P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 205) are reflected on his coinage only on his cistophori, coins on which Dionysiac types are standard and which in his case bear also the portrait of Octavia. ' For the titulature compare the sling bullet, ILLRP 1110; see also p. 101. • Note the signum Concordiae erected at Casinum, ILLRP 562a; R. Syme, RR, 218-20; Z. Yavetz, Plebs and princeps, 86.
' Compare the early bronze coin, no. 16/1. It is curious that this type is recorded as that of the seal of Pompeius, Plutarch, Pomp. 80. 8 For the naming of Alexander Helios and Cleopatra Selene in the course of 37, see W. W. Tarn, JRS 1932, 145; for the association of Sol with the golden age, Vergil, Eel. iv, 4 with Servius. * The trophy is not Sicilian, contra H. A. Grueber, BMCRR ii, 509 n. 1. 10 A tiara appears beside the head of Antonius, a prow beside that of Cleopatra; for the background to this issue see p. 102, for the types H. Buchheim, Orientpolitik, 73-4 (especially for the prow).
743
Types and legends giving that of his subordinate M. Silanus (no. 542); finally, the Legionary issue is content with the types Ship/Aquila between two standards.1 By contrast, the late Triumviral coinage of Octavian remains varied and inventive, preparing the way for the beautiful series with IMP.CAESAR or CAESAR DIVIF. which forms the bridge to the coinage of Octavian as Augustus.2 In 38, Agrippa produced an issue (no. 534) which uses for the first time on the coinage the praenomen imperatoris3 and, in alluding to Octavian's position as the son of the deified Caesar, portrays for the first time the sidus Iulium.* Octavian's coinage of 37 notes the renewal of the Triumvirate (nos. 537-8) and also for the first time introduces Apollo (or rather his tripod) as a type; 5 the coinage of 36 portrays the projected temples of Divus Iulius (no. 540), with the statue of Caesar as Augur inside and the sidus Iulium in the pediment.6 These issues are remarkable for another feature besides their interest and inventiveness; whereas the coinage of Antonius is struck in the name of his subordinates as well as his own to the very end, from 37 onwards Octavian's name alone appears on his coinage, both the Triumviral coinage (nos. 537-8 and 540) and in the issues widi IMP.CAESAR or CAESAR DIVI F. which succeed it; there could be no clearer indication of the arrival of autocracy.7 1
This enormous issue seems to have been noticed by the Roman antiquarians, Festus, s.v. Ratitum quadrantem, of which I offer a tentative restoration (cf. p. 717 n. 4): Ratitum quadrantem dictum putant, quod] in eo et triente ratis fuerint effigies,] ut navis in asse; unde Lucitius quadrantem] quoque ratitum appellavit in versibus; denarii quoque] ratiti Antonius auctor erat. Quadrantes ratitos et] trientes putat Verrius Flaccus ut manifesta pa]rs assis sit; quin semisses et sextantes ? Causa] nulla sic, sed semis navis effigiem habet et sex]tans; nee hac re ratiti erant denarii; nam sig]na ac legionum unam in eis habebat Antonius; sic] significat, quod hi pecunia legionibus erant, quarje ratio cum his putaretur. The denarii of D. Turullius (no. 545) are attractive, but unoriginal. 8 On this see M. H. Ctvnfoti,JRS 1974, 246-7. 8 See R. Syme, Historic 1958, 177-82; D. Kienast, ZSS 1961, 419 n. 77; R. Combes, Imperator 135; the praenomen appears at first in a clearly experimental form, IMP.DIVI IVLI F.TER; compare no. 494/16 for Caesar. • Pliny, NH ii, 93-4; Dio xlv, 7, 1; Vergil, Eel. ix, 46 with Servius; Servius on Vergil, Aen. viii, 681; S. Weinstock, Divus Iulius, 370-84. The sidus Iulium also appears on a bronze issue (no. 535) contemporary with the issue of Agrippa. 6 L. R. Taylor, Divinity, 119-20, discusses the beginnings of the relationship between Octavian and Apollo; see S. Weinstock, Divus Iulius, 14-15. • See S. Weinstock, Divus Iulius, 378. 7 The types of the coinage of Scarpus (no. 546) are wholly derivative; aquila between two standards and Victory are copied from nos. 544 and 545, Victory on globe from the post-Triumviral coinage of Octavian (M. H. Crawford, JRS 1974, 246-7); and the obverse type of Ammon seems to symbolise Africa, where the issue was produced, the right handfides(see Livy i, 21, 4 etc.; contra, P. Lederer, SNR 1942,16; E. Lommatzsch, RM 1897, 304).
744
10 ART AND COINAGE Republican coinage, in its artistic aspect, presents the same problem as does Roman art in general. The earliest Republican didrachms would be indistinguishable from Greek didrachms were it not for the ethnic, whereas the coinage of Caesar is 'obviously Roman'. Similarly, the relief of L. Aemilius Paullus at Delphi is Roman only by reason of its dedicator, whereas no-one would regard the triumphal relief from the Via del Mare as anything but Roman. The coinage of the Republic, however, is particularly important because it provides both the earliest evidence and the most continuous evidence for the history of Roman art; it is in consequence surprising to find that although lip-service is often paid to the importance of all this evidence,1 little serious use is made of it.2 All that I feel able to do here is to make a series of observations about some aspects of the artistic side of the coinage of the Republic.3 In the first place it is desirable to be aware of the extent to which the artists who cut the dies were independent agents.4 This shows in all sorts of little ways, in the casual introduction of a variant obverse type for the semuncia on an early bronze issue (no. 160/5), m the gradual substitution of a head of Mercury with a caduceus over his shoulder for a simple head of Mercury as the obverse type of the sextans,5 in the occasional use for the reverse type of the quadrans of attributes of Hercules, who forms the obverse type.6 The series of reverse types in the mid-second century portraying chariots drawn by bizarre animals is presumably the result of a passing artistic fashion;7 equally it is apparent that even in the relatively tightly controlled coinages of 44 and 42 spelling was a matter to be settled according to the whims of the individual engraver.8 There is also evidence that insofar as Republican die engravers used models at all, they tended to use numismatic models; the most striking example is provided by the restored denarii of 82 (nos. 369-71), deriving their reverse types from denarii of the second half of the second century; it is also worth drawing attention to those cases where the bronze types of one moneyer are copied from the silver types of another moneyer of the same year.9 Given this evidence, it is legitimate to draw 1
As by G. M. A. Richtcr, Ancient Italy, 67; J. M. C. Toynbee, Art 0/ the Romans, 19. See, however, J. M. C. Toynbee, Essays Mattingly, 205-27. 3 I do not here enter into the traditional controversy over classicism, etc., as in O. Vessberg, Kunstgeschichte, 118; G. M. A. Richter,J/J5 1958, 10. * On these artists see also p. 578. 5 7 See Index of Types. • See on no. 234. Nos. 222, 229, 231. 1 For variant letter forms see, e.g., no. 278. * Nos. 296 and 297, 341 and 342. 2
745
"•«
Art and coinage TABLE LXII.
Portraiture in the Republican coinage1
Subject
Issue
Comment; sculptured and gem parallels
T. Quinctius Flamininus
548/1
See commentary.
L. Cornelius Sulla
Q. Pompeius Rufus C. Coelius Caldus M. Claudius Marcellus A. Postumius Albinus
C. Antius Restio Uncertain L. Regulus Uncertain Arrius Uncertain Numonius Uncertain Ahenobarbus Uncertain Ahenobarbus Cn. Pompeius Magnus
Cn. Pompeius junior
C. Iulius Caesar
Portraits of ancestors (a) L. Curtius, MDA1(R) 1932, 202; contra, G. Traversari, Museo Archeologico di Venezia. I ritratti, no. 11. (b) E. Schmidt, 103 Winckelmannpr., 11; contra, V. Poulsen, Portraits, 138 (modern forgery). (c) Rhys Carpenter, AJA 1945, 353 (statue of Castor in group of Dioscuri with Amycus). (d) R. Herbig, Wurzburger Jahrbucher 1946, 108; B. Schweitzer, ibid., 258. (e) F. de Visscher, etc., Les Fouilles d'Alba Fucens, 184. See also commentary. 434/1 See commentary. 437/1-4 See commentary. 439/1 See commentary. 450/3 (a) B. Schweitzer, Bildniskunst, pis. 53-5 with p. 62. (b) See commentary. Neither seems particularly close to the coin portrait and the subject of the latter is in any case not securely identifiable. 455/1 494/26-31 513/2-3 514/2 WR. West, Portrdtplastik i,pl. lxvii, 16-18; B. Schweitzer, 519/1 519/2 J \ Bildniskunst, 101-2. A. Furtwangler, Antike Gemmen, pi. 47, 38. (a) 470/1 477/1, 3 A. Furtwangler, Antike Gemmen, pi. 50, 43. (b) 483/1-2 F. E. Brown, Studies Robinson i, 761; V. Poulsen, (c) 511/1,3 Portraits, 9. 2 Comparison of these two portraits seems to me to 477/2 establish beyond reasonable doubt that both are of the 511/1 same person, Cn. Pompeius junior. 434/1
Portraits of contemporaries (a) 480/2 This is the earliest and finest coin portrait of Caesar (so rightly A. Alfoldi, Antike Kunst 1959,27); no close sculptured or gem parallel exists for this portrait, from which all later coin portraits of Caesar appear to develop without borrowing from other art forms; this is conpicuously true of the later issues of 44.' The portraits produced thereafter may be classified thus:
1
For the alleged portrait of P. Scipio Africanus see commentary on no. 296. Note also the head of Janus with the features of Magnus on no. 479/1. * On the iconography of Caesar in general see (with earlier bibliography) E. Simon, Gymnasium 1957, 295; R. Herbig,K6lnerJahrbuch 1959,7; A. Andren, Op. Rom. 1960,14; V. Poulsen, Portraits, 11-12; N. Bonacasa, Ritratti, nos. 32-3; F. S. Johansen, Analecta Romano Instituti Danici 1967, 7; U. Jantzen, MDAI{R) 1968, 170; D. Kiang, SM 1969, 33; on gems see M.-L. Vollenweider, Antike Kunst i960, 81; the gem portrait published by H. Seyrig, RN 1969, 53 is worse than dubious. 8
746
Art and coinage TABLE LXII (COM.) Subject
Issue (b)-(e) 485/1
(f) 488/1-2 (g) 49O/2 (h) 49O/4 494/39 494/24 494/16 fl) 5 2 S/3~4 526/2,4 0 0 534/1 0) 535/i M. Antonius4
(a) 480/22 (b) 488/1-2 492/1-2
(c) 493/i (d) 494/17 494/32 496/2 (e) 496/1 516/4-5 (f) 496/3 516/1-2
Comment; sculptured and gem parallels The four varieties of portrait in the issue of L. Flaminius Chilo all seem to me to result from separate attempts to produce a portrait worthy of the dead and soon to be officially deified Caesar-all are noticeably grandiose in conception. This bizarre portrait is clearly the result of the incompetence of the engraver responsible for the dies of this issue; compare his portrait of M. Antonius, (b) below. Mutatis mutandis, the same comment applies, These four issues all seem to me to bear portraits by the same hand; the portraits appear to get larger as time goes on. This group of portraits follows on without serious innovation from the previous group. This youthful portrait represents an altogether new departure; its influence may perhaps be seen in the much smaller and more conventional portrait on 534/2. This superb portrait is again a new departure, harking back, presumably deliberately, to (a) above (or to the model from which (a) derives). From the same stable as the later portraits of Caesar of 44. A homogeneous group of incompetent portraits; I believe the dies to have been cut by one engraver, later the engraver of the dies for the Triumviral portrait gold of 42. This portrait is clearly the handiwork of the engraver of the portrait discussed under Octavian, (b) below. A homogeneous group of fine portraits, clearly the work of one engraver. These portraits seem to me to be the work of the same engraver, earlier responsible for the portraits discussed under M. Antonius, (b) above. With these portraits a new engraver appears (see p. 95); from them a homogeneous and, in its main outlines, unchanging style of Antonian portraiture develops; from this style only three issues deviate very much, that of P. Ventidius (no. 531/1), which bears a portrait distantly derived from those under discussion, no. 528/3, which seems to be a crude copy by an inferior engraver of no. 528/1-2, and no. 529/1 and 3, which forms part of the coinage of Octavian.' For an engraver's signature see p. 579 n. 4. For the iconography of M. Antonius see K. Christ, Gymnasium 1957, 504; V. Poulsen, Portraits, 17; O. Brendel, Hommages Grenier i, 359; H. Mobius, Festschrift Matz, 90; AA 1965, 867.
• I do not list here the portraits on the Triumviral portrait gold of 42, on which see under M. Antonius (b), also p. 579 n. 3 and p. 750 n. 1. * The upward-looking head of M. Antonius on no. 539/1 is, I suspect, directly borrowed from the iconography of Alexander.
747
Art and coinage TABLE LXII (COM.) Subject
Octavian1
Issue (a) 490/1 (b) 490/2 493/1 (c) 490/3-4 (d) 492/1 (e) 494/18 494/25 494/33
(f) 495/1-2 (g) 517/1-2, 6-8 528/1-3 (h) 525/1-2 526/1, 3 (•) 535/1-2
M. Aemilius Lepidus4
(a) 492/2 (b) 495/1-2
M. lunius Brutus
L. Antonius Sex. Pompeius Q. Labienus Parthicus Octavia M. Antonius junior Cleopatra
506/1 507/1 508/3 515/2 517/3-5 511/1 524/1-2 527/1 533/3 541/1-2 543/1
Comment; sculptured and gem parallels
These three portrait styles seem to me to be the work of three engravers, all working for Octavian in 43. This portrait is clearly the handiwork of the engraver of the portrait discussed under M. Antonius, (b) above. These portraits all seem to me to be the work of one engraver, who was earlier responsible for the portrait Ca) above and developed these portraits therefrom.With the exceptions discussed below, all of the portraits of Octavian on the Republican coinage produced under his control seem to remain in this tradition. See p. 749. The portraits of Octavian produced by M. Antonius in 41 and 39 naturally reflect the artistic tradition of the mint working for the latter (nos. 517 and 528). These two portraits, presumably produced at the mint of Rome, show a more mature and more dignified Octavian than appears on the products of his own mint. Like the portrait of Caesar on this issue, the portrait of Octavian is entirely sui generis. For the early sculptured portraits of Octavian see V. Poulsen, Portraits, 20-3. This portrait is clearly the handiwork of the engraver of the portrait discussed under M. Antonius, (b) above. See p. 749 On the iconography of Lepidus see L. Curtius, MDAI(R) 1932, 242 (arguing inter alia that the Pontifex Maximus on the so-called Ara Pacis is Lepidus).
(?) See V. Poulsen, Portraits, 13-15.
B. M. Felletti Maj, Museo Nazionale Romano. I ritratti, no. 80; H. Bartels, Frauenportra't, 14-28. 6 J. Charbonneaux, Libyca, 1954, 49.
• I have not listed the portrait-like head of Victory which occurs on nos. 489/5-6, 494/40 and 514/1, of the years 43-41; it has been regarded as that of Fulvia, which is perhaps hot impossible, in view of the head of Janus with the features of Cn. Pompeius Magnus on no. 479/1 and the identification of Magnus as Neptune on no. 483/1-2 (for the head of Fulvia see, originally, J. de Witte, Gazette Archeobgique 1875, 122-4; cf. W.-H. Waddington, RN 1853, 248, citing Fulvia as Victory on a coin of Fulvia/Eumeneia in Phrygia; for this coin see also BMC Phrygia, Eumeneia, no. 20). 748
Art and coinage attention to the striking similarity between the reverse type of the as of Cn. Blasio (no. 296/2) and a type used on the coinage of Agathocles, between the reverse type of a denarius of C. Vibius Pansa (no. 342/48 and 5a) and an earlier Syracusan type.1 The third point which I wish to make is that die engravers made use of their independence to compose completely new types, without reference to any sculptural or painted model whatever. The Republican tradition of pictorial evocation of the past was of course very old; the paintings of the Francois tomb, the Curia Hostilia (Pliny, NH xxxv, 22) and the Esquiline2 are good enough evidence of that; and the tradition was kept alive by the regular display in triumphs of pictures portraying events of the campaign just finished.3 But a composition such as that which forms the reverse type of the denarii of Caldus (no. 437) was clearly imagined for the first time when the type was being designed; it consists of disparate elements put together to illustrate the legends on die coin.4 We have, I diink, a picture of numismatic art as a branch of Republican art in its own right, widi die engravers given instructions only in general oudine by the moneyers and thereafter free to innovate, in no way tied to the development of die so-called major arts of sculpture and painting.5 It is therefore surprising to find it asserted that portraiture on coins is intimately linked widi portraiture in sculpture.6 The evidence suggests otherwise, at any rate for the Republic. Two examples, taken from the portraiture of contemporaries, suffice to illustrate die point.7 On the issue which bears the portraits of M. Lepidus and Octavian (no. 495), die two heads far more closely resemble each odier than either resembles odier portraits of each of the two men; when die legends are obliterated it is almost impossible to tell which is which. And on die Triumviral portrait gold of 42 (no. 494/1-15), there is a striking similarity between some of die portraits of die diree 1
Note also the oath-scenes on early gold (nos. 28-9), denarii of Ti. Veturius (no. 234) and denarii of the Italians during the Social War; there are also, however, gems with this design (see p. 715). For the repetition of types in the didrachm coinage see pp. 714-15 and 716. It is particularly remarkable that in a period when a dotted border on the reverse is regular, the quinarii of P. Sabinus and T. Cloulius (nos. 331-2) reproduce the line border of the early victoriati from which their reverse types are derived. * See D. Mustilli, // Museo Mussolini, 15-16. 3 For a list of historical paintings and a discussion of the Roman-ness of' Historiendarstellungen', see G. Zinserling, Wiss. Zeit. der Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat 1959-60, 403. * Cf. J. M. C. Toynbee, Essays Mattingly, 222-3; the assertion of A. Balil, Numisma 33, 1958, 9, that Republican coin types derive from pictorial models is unsupported by any evidence. Needless to say, the composition of the reverse type of a denarius could be an artistic disaster (see, for instance, no. 422). * They were doubtless, of course, influenced by it (and exercised influence on it) in ways that cannot now be determined. 6 So, for instance, O. Vessberg, Kunstgeschichte, 118-19; J- H. Jongkees, Ada Arch. (Cop.) 1965, 232. 7 It seems evident to me that when engravers of the Republican mint were creating 'portraits' of legendary figures they simply engraved on the dies what they thought an old man with a beard, an old man without a beard, etc. of the appropriate period looked like. Thus Tatius on no. 344 is much like Numa on no. 346, a contemporary issue by the same engraver, but this Numa is not at all like Numa on no. 446; and Brutus and Ahala on no. 433 are virtually indistinguishable.
749
Art and coinage men; 1 they come from the same hand2 and that was far more important in determining the final appearance of the heads than a desire to reproduce the aspect of a man or a statue.8 A die engraver, then, could be as free to create in cutting a portrait as in designing a historical representation ;* there is thus no a priori reason to suppose that in the case of a portrait taken (direcdy or from memory) from life the result will be a particularly accurate representation; there is equally little reason to suppose that a portrait of a historical, but no longer living, figure deriving from a statue will reproduce its features. It follows that the attempt to identify statues on the basis of coin portraits is doomed to failure; where a statue is not explicidy identified, whether by a label or by a historically identifiable archaeological context, only a very strong element of exaggeration of distinctive features can serve instead; the problems of unidentified statues have not been resolved, not because insufficient work or intelligence have been devoted to them, but because they are irresolvable.5 1
Compare, for instance, O(ctavian) I and (M.)L(epidus) VI on pi. iv of T. V. Buttrey, Portrait gold, and (M.)L(epidus) I and (M.)A(ntonius) VII on pis. iii and vi. Cf- p. 579; here, as in other issues, minor variations occur between one portrait and another ostensibly of the same man. D. E. Strong draws my attention to portraits of the Tetrarchs, where the similarity seems deliberate. ' For what it is worth, Table LXII contains a list of the different portraits of Romans occurring on Republican coins, together with some of the sculptural parallels that have been suggested at one time or another (see Addenda). * See G. M. A. Hanfmann, Observations, Chs. v-vi, on the desirability of seeing Roman portraiture primarily as interpreting personality. Even the so-called realism of Roman portraiture may be no more than an interpretative convention. ' I do not, incidentally, believe that there is any real reason to suppose that a statue need be particularly life-like, any more than a coin portrait; statues of the same person can only be associated by the presence of an explicit identification or of an element of exaggeration of distinctive features (as conspicuously with statues of Roman emperors). The re-use of statues in antiquity shows, after all, that ancient artists and patrons did not attach too much importance to the life-likeness of a representation (see H. Blanck, Wiedererviendung alter Statuen).
750
ADDENDA p. 28, The date of the denarius There have been two recent articles on this subject, by P. Marchetti in RBN 1971, 81, and by A. Alfoldi in MDAI(R) 1971, 5, both operating with a much smaller selection of evidence than my own treatment; I continue to believe that the date of the denarius is c. 211 and hope to deal with these two articles, as also with some recent archaeological evidence, in an article in Rivista Storica Italiana. p. 103, Appendix The bulk of Alfoldi's article, however, deals with the quadrigatus coinage and it is pleasing that we have come independently to basically the same conclusions about the main groups into which the coinage falls; unlike Alfoldi, who places the groups in a single sequence, covering six years, I prefer to leave open the precise relationship of the groups to each other, suspecting that some are contemporary with each other, and I am certain that the coinage covers something more like fourteen years. It may be helpful to provide a concordance between Alfoldi's plates and my own arrangement. No. 2 8 . . .Alfoldi, pis. 1-16 (except 14, 7); also 28,1 (out of context) 24.5-9 26, 1 and 3-8; 28, 2-6 ( = my PI. in, 1-2 and 6) 2 7 , 1 - 8 ; 28, 7; 38, 6 46, 7-8 ( = my PI. in, 9) 38, 3-5 and 7-9 39> 1-43,11 (except 43,5); 46,10 (transition to legend in relief, followed by legend in relief) (No. 28/5 39, 6) 36, 6-10 49. 1-8; 475 46, 2; 43, 5 ( = my PL iv, 7-9) No. 2 9 . . .Alfoldi, pis. 17-24, 4; 2 9 , 1 - 2 ; 2 5 , 1 ; 38, 2 (out of context, compare 20, 2) 48, 2-7 ( = my PI. v, 7-9) 37, 8-10 ( = my PI. v, 10) No. 3 0 . . .Alfoldi, pis. 3 0 , 6 - 3 5 , 1 ; also 14,7; 25,10; 2 7 , 9 ; 37,1-2 and 6; 4 8 , 1 ; 48, 8 (all out of context, note obverse style and full-figure Victory) 35, 2-36, 4 29. 5 - i o ; 30,1-5 ( = my PI. vi, 12) 3 7 > 4 - 5 ( = my PI. vi, 14) 37, 7 ( = my PI. vi, 6) No. 3 1 . . .Alfoldi, pis. 36, 5; 44; 45, 5-11; 46, 1 and 3 and 6 and 9 No. 32 37, 3 No. 33 26, 2 No. 34 25, 2-9 (The obverse of Alfoldi, pi. 38,1 belongs with the reverse of pi. 28, 8; the obverse of pi. 28, 8 with the reverse of pi. 38,1)
p. 73. n. 3 A. R. Hands, CR 1972,12, also argues against the dating by H. B. Mattingly of the quaestorship of Caepio to 100-99.
751
Addenda p. 71, The second century - absolute chronology and p. 81, n. 1 A. Alfoldi, RN 1971, 76, publishes some reverse die-links between my nos. 263-5 and 369-71 and goes on to argue that the two groups of issues are contemporary; this does not follow. Although the reverses of nos. 369-71 are very similar to those of nos. 263-5 even when not struck from the same dies, the obverse styles of the two groups are very unlike each other. There seem to be two possibilities. Either nos. 369-71 were struck at the same time as nos. 263-5 and entered circulation only in the Sullan age or reverse dies were kept of nos. 263-5 and used again to begin the production of nos. 369-71. The latter possibility seems to me preferable. Alfoldi's dating of the issues of the mid-second century is in any case much too high, leaning as it does on the Agrinion hoard (for which see my p. 72 n. 6) to the exclusion of all other evidence. For the chronology of the second-century coinage see also my publication of the Stobi hoard, cited below. p. 83, no. 402 H. Castritius, JNG 1971, 25, dates the aureus of Magnus to the period after his death; he is unaware of the date of the first triumph of Magnus, of the article by Mattingly with the same view as his own and of the metrological arguments against that view. p. 161, no. 58 Cremona 71 is a quadrans with reverse as 5a, but with§. p. 253, no. 213 In preparing the plates I became aware that the prow-stem on this issue is decorated with a female head; the issue perhaps belongs with no. 205. p. 256, no. 217 There is an as, Berlin 614/1875, with the legend C-TRLVC. p. 284, no. 259 Stobi hoard 898 shows a star on the flank of the horse. p. 316, no. 307 Further study of this issue, prompted by Mr H.-D. Schultz, has revealed a small aberrant group: Obverse - as 1 b-c Reverse - as 1 a Control-letter A (Tolstoi 633 = Berlin) Control-letter F (Turin; Barcelona) The obverse die is the same in each case; the reverse dies are not the same as the reverse dies with the corresponding control-letters within l a proper; the group presumably results from a confusion in the mint and does not affect the validity of the basic classification adopted in the catalogue. p. 323, no. 316 Naples, S5285 is a quadrans of this issue: Obverse - head of Hercules r.; behind, : .
Reverse - prow r.; above, L. "H ORI j below,
ROMA.
p. 367, no. 351 The legend on Cosa hoard 1307 is M-FA-N-I-CR +
752
Addenda p. 443, no. 419 G. Huber, Oberpontifikat, 93-7, argues that M. Lepidus is suggesting with the reverse type of 2 that Caesar as Pontifex Maximus is the man to be sent to Egypt to restore Ptolemy Auletes; I find the argument inherently improbable, quite apart from the problem of the date of the issue. p. 548, nos. 22-3* I should have mentioned that T. Mionnetj De la rareti el duprix des medailks rotnaines, 1, talks of a cast bar with the types Eagle on thunderbolt/Sword; this apparent hybrid between no. 4 and no. 8 is presumably simply a mistake. p. 548, no. 32* A. Alfoldi, MDAI(R) 1971, 48, accepts Oath-taking scene gold with mark of value XXX as genuine, without considering the arguments against its authenticity. p. 582, The process of striking The still-connected asses illustrated on PL. LXV, 5 (unearthed in the British Museum), show that lines of interconnected blanks were fed through between the two dies, presumably in the interests of increased productivity. p. 590, The Roman pound There have been three more attempts to calculate the weight of the Roman pound, M. le Roy arguing in BSFN1971,98 for 323-324 gr., M. Thirion in CEMB 1972,1 and 46 for 326.337231 gr. (!), M. Mola in Cahiers Num. 1972, 16 for c. 320 gr.; J. Guey and C. Carcassonne, in Milanges.. .P. Wuilleumier, 151, confirm my view that the weight of the Roman pound cannot be calculated with complete accuracy. p. 624 R. Thomsen, Class, et Med., Diss. ix, 194 (p. 195, end of 1. 10, for 'Asses' read 'Denarii') deals with the pay of the Roman soldier, coming to basically the same conclusion as myself. p. 715 nn. 1 and 5 A. Alfoldi, MDA1(R) 1971, 13-16 and 16-22, repeats his belief that the Oath-taking scene gold figures the Penates, and Aeneas and Latinus, without new argument. p. 733 n. 2 and p. 740 n. 6 A. Alfoldi returns to his concern to find evidence for a longing for a saviour in the late Republic in Chiron 1972, 215-30, 'Redeunt Saturnia regna III. Jupiter-Apollo und Veiovis', compare the discussion of Apollo in RN 1971, 76 (see above); Chiron 1973, 131. I remain unpersuaded that the picture he presents has any real existence. p. 745, ch. 10 H. M.-L. Vollenweider is in the process of publishing a corpus of Republican gems, including a large number of portrait gems; parallels to the portraits listed in Table LXII are thus greatly increased in number, though not all her identifications are perhaps acceptable (see my review forthcoming in JRS). ERRATA In Table XLHI :
Reverse die 3 = reverse die 28. Obverse die 43 is two dies - A with reverse die 47; A with reverse dies 59, 60 and 61.
753
PLATES
KEY TO THE PLATES I have tried to illustrate all pieces of which a picture is necessary to the argument of the book and all pieces which are of historical importance; the working of this criterion may be seen in the fact that I illustrate all the Triumviral portrait gold of 42 B.C. and only a selection of the denarii of Q. Pomponius Musa. Almost all aesgrave is illustrated from photographs, almost all struck pieces from casts; I have occasionally found it necessary to use photographs for the latter and I have even more occasionally inserted a reference to an illustration elsewhere for a coin which I have not been able to illustrate. Plates A and B and the first two pieces on PI. c are one-third of their actual size. The rest of PI. c and Pis. D-I are one-half actual size. PLATE I (Aes grave on PLATES A - F ) 1/1 2/1
3/i
4/ia 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 9/1
10/1 11/1 12/1 13/1 14/1 14/2 14/3
Apollo/Bull bronze Minerva/Bull bronze Cornuacopiae/Branch bar
Vienna Naples, Fi 13828 Berlin Santa Marinella hoard BMCRR Aes signatum 2 BMCRR Aes signatum 1 Miinzen und Medaillen 47,8 BM BM BM BM Berlin Paris BM 1949-4-11-967 (obv.), 1946-1-1-33 (rev.)
Eagle/Pegasus bar Bull/Bull bar Corn-ear/Tripod bar Shield/Shield bar Sword/Scabbard bar Elephant/Sow bar Anchor/Tripod bar Trident/Caduceus bar Chickens/Tridents bar Mars/Horse's head ROMANO didrachm Dioscuri/Mercury series
BM 1906-11-3-2806
14/4 14/5 14/6 14/7 15/lb l6/ia 17/ia 17/lg 18/1 18/2
Apollo ROMANO/Horse didrachm Goddess/Lion bronze Minerva/Horse's head bronze Apollo/Apollo series
18/3 18/4 18/5 18/6 19/1 10/2
Dioscurus/Apollo series
BMC Italy, p. 48, no. 6 BMC Italy, p. 48, no. 8 BMC Italy, p. 49, no. 12 BMC Italy, p. 49, no. 17 BMC Italy, p. 49, no. 20 BMC Italy, p. 49, no. 21 Paris, Luynes BMCRR Romano-Campanian 26 Vatican 6 Vatican 23 BMC Italy, p. 51, no. 6 BMC Italy, p. 52, no. 11 BMC Italy, p. 52, no. 13 BMC Italy, p. 52, no. 20 Birmingham BMC Italy, p. 53, no. 33 Santa Marinella hoard Santa Marinella hoard
757
Key to the plates 20/1 21/1 21/2 22/1 22/1 23/1 24/4 24/5 24/6b 24/7 25/1 25/2 25/3 26/1 26/2 26/3 26/4 27/1 27/2 27/3 27/4
Hercules/She-wolf R O M A N O didrachm Roma/Roma series
Moscow
BM 1919-11-20-138 BMC Italy, p. 45, no. 2 Roma/Victory R O M A N O didrachm BM 1935-6-19-61 Moscow Minerva/Eagle bronze Fallani Wheel series BMC Italy, p. 54, no. 6 (obv.), no. 5 (rev.) BMC Italy, p. 54, no. 8 (obv.) BMC Italy, p. 54, no. 13 (obv.) BMC Italy, p. 54, no. 18 (obv.) Mars/Horse's head ROMA didrachm BMCRR Romano-Campanian 59 drachm BMCRR Romano-Campanian 63 bronze BMCRR Romano-Campanian 67 Apollo/horse R O MA didrachm BMCRR Romano-Campanian 68 Paris, AF drachm BMCRR Romano-Campanian 70 bronze BM 1946-1-1-36 Roma/Dog ROMA bronze Naples hoard Mars/Horse R O MA didrachm BMCRR Romano-Campanian 53 bronze Oxford (obv.), Bari (rev.) Hercules/Pegasus bronze with club with bow Paris, A3389 (obv.), A3388 (rev.) PLATE II
28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/1 28/1 28/2 28/4 28/3
Quadrigatus
Stater Half-stater
Half-quadrigatus Quadrigatus
BM 1931-12-7-1 BM Naples hoard 26 BM Naples hoard 47 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 88 Paris = RN 1934, pi. i, 11 BM Naples hoard 42 BM Naples hoard 12 Capitol hoard Capitol hoard BMCRR Romano-Campanian 76 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 75 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 77 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 111 BM Naples hoard 14 PLATE I I I
28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 32/1
Paris = RN 1934, pi. i, 10
Turin
BM 1930-6-22-31 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 78 BM Naples hoard 20 Siena Paris = RN 1934, pi. i, 12 Moscow
Quadrigatus
Paris = RN 1934, pi. ii, 13 BM 1934-3-12-70 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 91 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 80
758
Key to the plates PLATB IV
28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/3 28/5 28/3 28/3 28/3 31/1 31/1 31/1 31/1 33/1 34/1
Quadrigatus
BM 1931-5-2-2 BM 1930-6-19-3 BM 1939-5-11-31 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 101 BM 1931-5-2-1 Naples Si520
Litra Quadrigatus
Moscow Salve hoard
BM (Nott) BMCRR Romano-Campanian 100 Paris = RN 1934, pi. ii, 10 BM 1934-5-19-1 BM BMCRR Romano-Campanian 81 BM (Pierfitte)
Quadrigatus
Quadrigatus Quadrigatus
PLATE V
29/3 29/3 29/3 29/3 29/1 29/2 29/3 29/3 29/3 29/3 29/4 29/4 40/ib
Quadrigatus
30/1 30/1 30/1 30/2 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1 30/1
Quadrigatus
35/i 35/2
Series with prow r.
Stater Half-stater
Half-quadrigatus Quadrans with corn-ear
Moscow BMCRR Romano-Campanian 90 BM 1950-11-6-9 Oxford Paris (Bf., Gold., pi. i, 5) Paris (Bf., Gold., pi. i, 15) BMCRR Romano-Campanian 93 Cambridge Naples S1489 Paris = RN 1934, pi. ii, 6 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 112 Oxford Syracuse 31950 PLATE VI
BMCRR Romano-Campanian 95 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 94 Paris=RN 1934, pi. i, 16 Berlin BM Naples hoard 53 Selinunte hoard Selinunte hoard BM Naples hoard 56 BM Naples hoard 22 BM Naples hoard 52 BM Naples hoard 18 Paris = RN 1934, pi. i, 9 Naples (Campanian hoard) BM 1935-6-8-1
Half-quadrigatus Quadrigatus
PLATE vil (Aes grave on PLATES G - I )
BMCRR Aes grave 9 BMCRR Aes grave 27
759
Key to the plates 35/3a 35/4 35/5 35/6 36/1 37/ia 38/1 38/2 38/5 38/6 38/7 38/8 39/i 39/2 39/3 39/4 39/5 41/3a 41/4 41/58 4i/6e
BMCRR Aes grave 35 BMCRR Aes grave 46 BMCRR Aes grave 55 BM As with prow 1. Minerva/Bull as Semilibral series
BM 1919-12-22-41
Collateral series
Post-semilibral series
BMCRR Italy (Aes grave) 1 (obv.), 2 (rev.) BMCRR Aes grave 19 BMCRR Aes grave 31 BMCRR Rome 64 BMCRR Rome 98 BMCRR Rome 131 BMCRR Rome 170 Paris, I, 21-22 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 119 Paris, AF 88A BMCRR Romano-Campanian 129 BM 1946-1-1-39 (obv.), RomanoCampanian 137 (rev.) BMCRR Rome 20 BMCRR Rome 22 BMCRR Aes grave 21 Rome, Capitol 241
PLATE VIII (Aesgrave on PLATE 1) 41/7b 4i/8b 4i/9 41/10 41/11 42/1 42/2 42/3 42/4 42/5 43/1 43/2a 43/3a
43/5
Quadrigatus with corn-ear Quadrans with corn-ear Sextans with corn-ear Uncia with corn-ear Semuncia with corn-ear As with I Semis with U Triens with U Uncia with U
BMCRR Rome 44 BMCRR Rome 57 Cambridge BMCRR Rome 109 BMCRR Rome 167 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 108 BMCRR Romano-Campanian 139 Paris, A2107 Oxford BMCRR Italy 87 BMCRR Italy (Aes grave) 3 BMCRR Italy (Aes grave) 4 BMCRR Italy (Aes grave) 6 BMCRR Italy (Aes grave) 9 PLATE IX
44/1 44/1 44/1 44/1 44/1 44/1 44/2 44/3 44/4 44/5 44/6 44/7 44/5
Anonymous victoriatus
Anonymous 60-as gold piece Anonymous 40-as gold piece Anonymous 20-as gold piece
Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous
denarius quinarius sestertius denarius
NC 1970, pi. iv, 1 NC 1970, pi. iv, 96 NC 1970, pi. iv, 97 NC 1970, pi. iv, 98 NC 1970, pi. iv, 99 Bastianelli 214 = Crawford BMCRR Rome 185 BMCRR Rome 188 BM (Clark) Hannover 30 Hannover 86 BMCRR Italy 9 Copenhagen (4.49 gr.) 76O
Key to the plates 44/6 44/7 44/5 44/6 44/6 44/7 44/5 44/6 44/5 44/6 44/5 45/1 45/2 45/3
Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous
quinarius sestertius denarius quinarius
Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous
sestertius denarius quinarius denarius quinarius denarius denarius quinarius sestertius
46/1 47/ia 47/ib 48/1 50/1 50/2 50/3 50/8 51/1 52/1 53/1 53/1 53/2 53/2 53/2 53/2 53/2 53/2 53/2 53/2 54/1 55/1 56/3 56/4
Anonymous denarius Anonymous quinarius
56/5 56/5 56/5 56/6 56/1 56/2 56/2 56/2 56/3 56/3 56/3
Anonymous quadrans (var.)
BMCRR Rome 207 BMCRR Rome 13 BMCRR Italy 90 BMCRR Rome 205 NC 1972, pi. 8, 57 BMCRR Rome 214 BMCRR Italy 89 NC 1972, p. 80, no. 80 BMCRR Rome 6 BMCRR Rome 9 BMCRR Italy 3 BMCRR Italy 91 Oxford Hannover 1911/253
PLATE x
Anonymous quinarius 60-as gold piece with anchor Denarius with anchor As with anchor Uncia with anchor Denarius with M Denarius with apex Anonymous victoriatus Anonymous denarius
Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous Anonymous
denarius denarius semis (var.) triens (var.)
BMCRR Italy 2 Locri hoard BMCRR Italy 5 Vatican 192 BMCRR Italy 19 BMCRR Italy 22 BM 1968-10-4-1 Hannover 403 Paris, A3423 BMCRR Italy 41 BMCRR Rome 296 NC 1970, pi. iv, 171 Haeberlin 109 = BM BMCRR Italy 114 BMCRR Rome 359 BMCRR Rome 364 BMCRR Rome 361 BMCRR Rome 290 Paris BMCRR Rome 291 ANS A. pi. 1, 7 Paris, A1093 Paris, A1106 (A. pi. lx, 17)
PLATE XI
Anonymous sextans (var.) Anonymous dupondius Anonymous as Anonymous semis
Vierordt 1923, 85 (not illustrated here) Citta Ducale hoard BMCRR Italy 292 (A. pi. lxi, 15) Paris, AF BM 1912-7-14-27 (A. pi. lv, 5) Paris Paris BMCRR Rome 222 (A. pi. liv, 9) Citta Ducale hoard (A. pi. Ivii, 13-14) Paris, A931 (A. pi. Ivii, 15) Citta Ducale hoard (A. pi. lviii, 1-2)
761
Key to the plates 56/4
Anonymous triens
56/4
Paris, AF (A. pi. lx, 13 (sextantal), 16 and 18 (uncial)) BMCRR Rome 253 (A. pi. lx, 12)
PLATE XII
56/5
Anonymous quadrans
56/5 56/6 56/2 56/3
Anonymous sextans Anonymous as Anonymous semis
56/3 56/4
Anonymous triens
56/5
Anonymous quadrans
56/5 56/6
Anonymous sextans
56/7
Anonymous uncia
56/8 57/1 57/2 57/4
Anonymous semuncia Victoriatus with crescent Denarius with crescent Semis with crescent
58/1 58/2 58/78 59/ta 59/ib 59/4 60/ia 60/ic 60/6 61/1 61/4 62/1 63/1 63/6 64/1 64/6a 65/1 65/6 67/1 68/ia 68/ib 68/ib
Victoriatus with cornucopiae Denarius with cornucopiae Sextans with cornucopiae Denarius with apex and hammer
Paris, A1006 (A. p. lxi, 8 (sextantal), 11-13 (uncial)) Paris, A1007 (A. pi. lxi, 7 (sextantal), 14 (uncial)) BMCRR Rome 266 (A. pi. lxiii, 13 and 15) BMCRR Rome 219 Citta Ducale hoard (A. pi. lviii, 4 and 6-9 (sextantal), 12-13 and lix, 3-4 (uncial)) Paris, AF (A. pi. lviii, 5) BMCRR Rome 248 (A. pi. lx, 8-11 and 14 (sextantal), 19-20 and lxi, 1-3 (uncial)) BMCRR Rome 258 (A. pi. lxi, 9-10 (sextantal), 16-18 and lxvi, 8 (uncial)) BMCRR Rome 255 BMCRR Rome 411 (A. pi. lxiii, 11-12 (sextantal), Ixiv, 1-2 (uncial), 5-6 (allegedly semuncial)) BMCRR Rome 271 (A. pi. Ixiv, 7-8 (sextantal), 9-io(uncial), 12 (allegedly semuncial)) Paris, AF (A. pi. Ixiv, 13-17) BMCRR Rome 436 Oxford BMCRR Rome 339
PLATE XIII
Triens with apex and hammer Denarius with caduceus Sextans with caduceus Denarius with Victory Triens with Victory Denarius with rostrum tridens Quinarius with C Sextans with C Quinarius with AA Sextans with AA Quinarius with /V? Sextans with A£ Anonymous victoriatus Denarius with corn-ear
BMCRR Rome 422 BM 1928-6-7-2 Hannover 768a Oxford BMCRR Italy 42 Paris, A1578 BM 1928-6-7-1 Paris, A1720 BM 1968-10-4-2 BMCRR Italy 24 BMCRR Italy 33 BMCRR Italy 23 Haeberlin 291 = BM BMCRR Italy 188 Paris, AF BMCRR Italy 122 Paris, A4958 bis Cambridge NC 1970, pi. iv, 174 Oxford Bastianelli 251 = BM Hannover 472
762
Key to the plates PLATE XIV
68/23 68/2b 68/3 69/1 69/23 69/6a
Quinarius with corn-ear Anonymous sestertius Dupondius with corn-ear As with corn-ear Sextans with corn-ear Anonymous victoriatus Victoriatus with C/M
70/1 71/ia 7i/ib 71/ic Victoriatus with corn-ear 72/i Silver coin of Agrigentum of Second A 72/2 72/3 72/4 72/5 72/7
Voirol 109 = BM Hannover 475 Hannover 88 BMCRR Italy (Appendix) 23 Birmingham Oxford NC 1970, pi. v, 177 BMCRR Italy 254 BM 1926-1-16-999 NC 1970, pi. v, 183 BMCRR Italy 338
BM
Punic War period 20-as gold piece with corn-ear Denarius with corn-ear Quinarius with corn-ear Semis with corn-ear Quadrans with corn-ear
Copenhagen BMCRR Rome 283 BMCRR Rome 284 Berlin Cambridge PLATE XV
73/1 73/2 74/1 74/2 75/ib 75/ic
Denarius with adze Quinarius with adze Denarius of C. Var Quinarius of C. Var Denarius of C. Al
Denarius with branch As with branch Denarius with corn-car and crooked staff Denarius with staff 78/1 Denarius with wheel 79/1 80/1 a Denarius with dolphin 80/1 b 80/2 As with dolphin 81/1 As of Cn. Co 82/1 Semis with Ceres/Hercules
76/13 76/2 77/1
Paris, A1591 BMCRR Rome 286 Oxford Paris, A15424 BMCRR Rome 287* BMCRR Italy 107 BMCRR Italy 112 Paris, A1704 Hannover 476a BMCRR Rome 302 BMCRR Italy 308 Hannover 1284 BMCRR Rome 289 Paris, A1984 Yale Turin F192
PLATE XVI
83/ia Victoriatus with spearhead 83/ib 83/2 Denarius with spearhead 83/3 84/1 84/2 84/3 84/4
85/ia 85/4 86A/1 86A/3
Quinarius with spearhead Denarius with R& Quinarius with R2. Sestertius with RR As with R8, Quinarius with H Triens with H Quinarius with Q Quadrans with Q
BMCRR Rome 321 NC 1970, pi. v, 185 BMCRR Italy 54 BMCRR Itsly 55 Haeberlin 247 = BM Vatican 416 BMCRR Italy 192 BMCRR Italy (Appendix) 22 BMCRR Italy 197 BMCRR Italy 210 BMCRR Italy 217 BMCRR Italy 222
763
Key to the plates 86B/2 87/5 88/1 88/2a 88/2b 88/2b 88/2b 88/8 89/ia 89/ib
Semis with Q and anchor
BMCRR Rome 538
Sextans with V 60-as gold piece with spearhead Denarius with spearhead
BMCRR Italy 241 Paris, A2213 Paris, A2245 BMCRR Rome 318 Paris, A2247 Cambridge Berlin BMCRR Rome 310 Hannover 716
Uncia with spearhead Victoriatus with club
PLATE XVII
89/2 Denarius with club 89/2 89/3 As with club 90/1 Anonymous double-victoriatus 90/2 Anonymous victoriatus 91/ia Victoriatus with torque 91/ib 92/ia Victoriatus with C ROT 92/ib 93/ia Victoriatus with AA1 93/ib 93/ic 94/1 Victoriatus with !/1 95/ia Victoriatus with V 95/ib 95/ic 95/2 Half-victoriatus with 6 96/1 Anonymous victoriatus 97/ia Victoriatus with U 97/ib 97/ic 97/1 var. 97/2 Quinarius with U
Cambridge Mascra hoard 292 Cambridge Paris, xvi/23 NC 1970, pi. vi, 190 (cf. C and D) BMCRR Italy 337 BMCRR Italy 147 BMCRR Italy 245 BMCRR Italy 143 BMCRR Italy 248 Hannover 604 NC 1970, pi. vi, 189 BM 1934-12-7-1 BMCRR Italy 233 BMCRR Italy 235 Hannover 665 BMCRR Italy 236 Copenhagen BMCRR Italy 160 BMCRR Italy 161 BMCRR Italy 157 Bastianelli 209 = Crawford BMCRR Italy 152 PLATE XVIII
97/5° 97/7a 97/7b 97/8 97/11 97/12 97/133 97/i3d 97/17 97/22a 97/22b
Quadrans with U Uncia with U Semuncia with LQuincunx with U Triens with U Quadrans with U Semis with U As with U
97/23 Dextans with U 97/28 As with U
Oxford BMCRR Italy 167 Hannover 553 Vienna Paris, A3265 BMCRR Italy 163 BMCRR Italy 164 Paris, A3314 Bari 1945 (Table xvm, 77) Paris, A3228 Hannover 1592 (obv.), Naples 116044 (rev.) BMCRR Italy 169 Paris, A3234 (Table xvm, 87)
764
Key to the plates PLATE XIX
98A/ia
Victoriatus with U/T
98A/ID 98A/IC
98A/1 var. 98A/1 var. 98 A/1 var. 98A/2 98A/3
Half-victoriatus with U/T Quinarius with U Sestertius with I Sextans with U/T Anonymous quinarius As with P
98A/4a 98A/6 98B/1 99/1 a 99/10 100/1 a As with C A 100/3 Triens with CM 101/1 101/2 102/1 102/2a
Victoriatus struck on Corcyra Quinarius struck on Corcyra Victoriatus with Q Quinarius with Q
102/20 1O2/2C
102/2d
BMCRR Italy 176 BMCRR Italy 178 BM 1938-3-13-1 Paris, A3637 NC 1970, pi. vi. 195 Oslo Hague 270 BMCRR Italy 154 Paris, A3210 Paris, A3411 Hannover 333 BMCRR Italy 257 Paris, A3549 BMCRR Italy 265 BM Rome 0057 (obv. - mint-mark off flan), BMCRR Italy 270 (rev.) BMCRR Italy 227 Oxford BMCRR Italy 219 BMCRR Italy 214 BMCRR Italy 135 Copenhagen (cf. NC 1972, p. 81, no. 157) Oxford PLATE XX
103/la 103/lb 103/ic 103/28 104/ia 104/1 b 105/1 105/2
105/3 106/1 106/2
io6/3a io6/3b
Victoriatus with /NA Quinarius with AA Denarius with B
Brussels 11, 49.184 NC 1970, pi. vi, 197 Paris, A3523 BMCRR Italy 229 BM 1928-6-7-4 BM 1920-5-10-1
Victoriatus with pentagram 60-as gold piece with pentagram Denarius with pentagram Victoriatus with staff 60-as gold piece with staff Denarius with staff
106/3C 106/4 106/7C 107/ia
As with staff Quadrans with staff Denarius with C
107/ib 107/ic 107/id 108/1 109/1
Denarius with caduceus Denarius with knife
BM 1934-5-22-7 BMCRR Italy 76 BM 1928-6-5-7 Paris, A2393 BMCRR Italy 60 Hannover 275 Hannover 279a BMCRR Italy 62 Paris, A2399 BM
Oxford BMCRR Italy 185 BM 1928-6-7-6 BM 1933-4-14-0 BMCRR Italy 48 BM PLATE XXI
110/ia 110/ib
Denarius with wreath
Cordova hoard = BM Crawford
765
Key to 110/2 lll/l 112/1 112/23 112/28 112/2b 112/3
BMCRR Rome 326 BMCRR Italy 116 BMCRR Rome 441 BMCRR Rome 440 Berlin Paris, AF
As with wreath Denarius with A/ Victoriatus with staff Denarius with staff
As with staff H2/6a Quadrans with staff U2/6b 113/1 Denarius with star
113/1 113/2 114/1 114/4 115/1 115/1
Hannover 1016a Paris, A2366 Hannover BMCRR Rome 459 Paris, A1599 Paris, A1604 BMCRR Rome 449 BMCRR Rome 456 Paris, A2839 Paris, A2838
As with star Denarius with rostrum tridens Triens with rostrum tridens Denarius with trident
PLATE XXII
116/ia 116/ib 116/2 117A/1 117B/1 118/5 119/1 119/2 119/8 120/1 120/2 120/4 121/1 121/2 121/4 123/1 123/2
Denarius with bull
BMCRR Italy 319 Paris, A2802 Paris, A2726 Paris, A2293 Paris, A2304
As with bull Denarius with rudder As with bird and rudder Sextans with helmet Victoriatus with thunderbolt
Hannover 928a BMCRR Rome 472
Denarius with thunderbolt
Paris, A2260
Uncia with thunderbolt Victoriatus with knife Denarius with knife Semis with knife Victoriatus with sow Denarius with sow Semis with sow Denarius with ram As with ram
Hannover 780 Paris, A2403
BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR Rochetta Berlin
Rome 474 Rome 477 Rome 481 Rome 479 a Volturno hoard
Vatican 6182 PLATE XXIII
122/1 122/2 122/3 124/1 124/2 124/4 125/1 126/1 127/1 128/1 129/1 130/ia 131/1 132/1 132/1 132/2 132/3
Victoriatus with dog Denarius with dog As with dog Victoriatus with meta Denarius with meta Semis with meta Denarius with QLC Denarius of Varro Denarius with female head Denarius with shield and carnyx Denarius with pentagram Denarius with staff and feather Denarius with staff and wing Victoriatus of Metellus
Hannover 907 Paris, A1774 bis BMCRR Rome 489 Paris, A1670 Paris, A1667 Rochetta a Volturno hoard BMCRR Italy 350 BMCRR Italy 351 Vatican 2988 BMCRR Italy 312 Paris, A2695 BMCRR Italy 307 BM 1922-1-10-1
Paris, AF Vatican 1120
Denarius of Metellus As of Metellus
Paris, AF Paris, A3492
766
Key to the plates 132/5 133/1 1 33/3
133/4 134/ib 134/2 135/1 135/1 136/1 136/1 136/3 137/1 137/1 137/1 137/1 137/3 138/1 138/1 139/1 139/1 140/1 140/1 141/1 141/1
Triens of Metellus Victoriatus of Tampilus Denarius of Tampilus
Paris, A3505 Hannover 1106 Paris, A5084
PLATE As of Tampilus Denarius of L. Plautius Hypsaeus As of L. Plautius Hypsaeus Denarius with owl
XXIV Rochetta a Volturno hoard Hannover 1115 BMCRR Rome 555 Paris, A1814 BMCRR Italy 324 Paris, A3014 Vatican 1073 Rochetta a Volturno hoard Paris, A1909 Hannover 1256 Paris, A 1906 Montecarotto hoard Paris, A1939 BMCRR Rome 630 Hannover 1222 BMCRR Rome 570 Petacciato hoard BMCRR Rome 574 Vatican 233a Hannover 1069 BMCRR Rome 591
Denarius with N Semis with N Denarius with crescent
Semis with crescent Denarius of P. Maenius Anonymous denarius Anonymous denarius Denarius of Todillus
PLATE I4i/2a As of Todillus i4i/5b Quadrans of Todillus 142/5 Sextans with bull and /V Sextans with shield and 143/5 Uncia with Victory and -D 144/6 Sextans with Victory and spearhead 145/5 Denarius of Autronius 146/1 146/1 Denarius of Cn. Domitius 147/1 147/1 As of Cn. Domitius 147/2 Semis of Q. Marius 148/2 149/ib As of L. Mamilius 149/5° Sextans of L. Mamilius Quadrans of M. Titinius 150/4 Triens of S. Furius 151/1 152/ia Denarius of Sx. Q 152/ib 152/ic Denarius of Cn. Calpurnius 153/1 153/1
xxv Rome, Capitol Paris, A2645 Hannover 994 BM 1931-4-8-13 BM 1931-10-7-9 Rochetta a Volturno hoard Paris, A5051 Paris, A5054 Paris, A9127 Cambridge Berlin Rochetta a Volturno hoard Bonazzi 833 (not illustrated here) BMCRR Rome 726 Paris, A15646 Rome, Capitol 3000 Paris, A14593 BMCRR Italy 416 Sydenham 77 = Birmingham Hannover 1601 BMCRR Rome 621
PLATE XXVI
154/1 154/1
Denarius of L. Coilius
Paris, A7767 Paris, A7769
767
Key to the plates 155/1 155/1 155/2 156/1 156/1 156/2 156/3 157/1 157/1 158/1 158/1 159/1 159/2 159/2 159/3 159/4 160/1 160/5 161/1 161/1
Denarius of Purpureo As of Purpureo Denarius with prawn As with prawn Quadrans with prawn Denarius with cornucopiae Anonymous denarius Victoriatus with fly Denarius with fly As with fly Semis with fly As with dolphin Semuncia with dolphin Denarius of Talna
Hannover 1336 Vatican 2859 Bf. ii, pi. iii, 62 (not illustrated here) BMCRR Rome 585 Paris, A2788 A., pi. lxxxxiv, 9 (not illustrated here) A., pi. lxxxxiv, 10 (not illustrated here) Paris, A1820 BMCRR Rome 583 Hannover 1060 Vatican 229 Hannover 1044 BMCRR Italy 377 Paris, A2581 Paris, A2597 Rochetta a Volturno hoard Paris, A1992 Vatican 6330 Hannover 1056 Vatican 3818 PLATE XXVII
161/2 161/3 162/ia 162/ib i62/2a l62/2b i62/2a l62/2b l62/2b l62/2b 162/4 163/1 163/1 164/ia 164/ib 165/ia 165/ib 166/1 167/1 168/1 168/2 169/1
As of Talna Semis of Talna Victoriatus cf Matienus Denarius of Matienus
Sydenham 94 = BM Paris, A11800 Paris, A12627
Hannover 605 BMCRR Italy 406 Hannover 1296 BMCRR Italy 401 ANS
Semis of Matienus Denarius with feather Anonymous denarius Denarius with anchor Anonymous victoriatus Anonymous denarius Victoriatus with helmet Denarius with helmet Denarius with G R
Hague 282 Milan 352 Rochetta a Volturno hoard BMCRR Italy 394 (obv.), 397 (rev.) Oxford BMCRR Italy 281 BMCRR Italy 283 Masera hoard BMCRR Italy 295 BMCRR Italy 368 BMCRR Italy 366 BMCRR Italy 372 BMCRR Italy 371 Hannover 1249 PLATE XXVIII
170/1 171/1 171/1 172/1 172/1 172/2 .
Denarius with ear Denarius with D Denarius with AA As with AA
Hannover 1260 BMCRR Italy 355 Hannover 501 Masera hoard Hannover 1207 Fontanarosa hoard
768
Key to the plates 172/3 173/1 173/4 174/1 174/2 175/1 176/1 176/4
Semis with AA As of C. Saxula Quadrans of C. Saxula As of A. Caecilius Semis of A. Caecilius As of C. Saenius As of Paetus Quadrans of Paetus
177/1 177/3 178/3 179/1 J 79/5 180/1 180/5 181/1 181/2 182/1 182/2 182/5 183/2
As with T Triens with T Triens of Cina As of Balbus Sextans of Balbus As of Saxula Sextans of Saxula As with caps of Dioscuri Semis with caps of Dioscuri Denarius with gryphon As with gryphon Quadrans with gryphon Semis with wolf and twins
183/1 184/ia 184/4 185/5 186/2 187/1 187/7 188/1 188/5 189/5 189/1 190/1 190/6 191/1 191/2
As with wolf and twins As with butterfly and vine-branch Quadrans with butterfly and vine-branch Sextans of Varo Semis of Murena Denarius of Purpureo Uncia of Purpureo AsofOpeimius Sextans of Opeimius Sextans of P. Blasio As of P. Blasio AsofOpeimius Uncia of Opeimius As of Valerius Semis of Valerius
192/1 192/2 193/2 193/4 194/1 194/2 195/1 195/3 196/1
As with A Semis with A Semis of Turdus Quadrans of Turdus As with anchor Semis with anchor As with ass Triens with ass As with star
Vatican 6304 Paris, A7713 Munich Paris, A5324 Paris, A5353 BMCRR Rome 810 Paris, A4811 Paris, AF
PLATE XXIX
Paris, A3641 Paris, A3663 Paris, A8298 Paris, A3805 BMCRR Rome 617 Paris, A7689 Paris, A7707 Paris, AF Paris, A1662 BMCRR Italy 331 Paris, A2341 Turin Rochetta a Volturno hoard PLATE XXX
Munich Paris, A2672 BMCRR Rome 512 Hannover 1331 Paris, A11862 BMCRR Italy 422 Hannover 2294a Paris, A13385 Berlin BMCRR Rome 792 Paris, A8242 RIN 1964, 23 (not illustrated here) Paris, A13384 Malignano (AJA 1968, 281) Rochetta a Volturno hoard
PLATE XXXI
Paris, A2993 Rochetta a Volturno hoard Rochetta a Volturno hoard Cambridge Paris, A1511 Rochetta a Volturno hoard BMCRR Rome 521 Paris, A2630 Munich
769
Key to the plates 196/4 Quadrans with star 197/ia Denarius with Victory in biga 197/ib 198/1 Denarius with Dioscuri
Paris, A1640 BMCRR Italy 429 Paris, A693 BMCRR Italy 390 PLATE XXXII
i97-8B/ib Anonymous as 199/lb Denarius of Saranus 199/2 As of Saranus Quadrans of Saranus 199/5 200/1 Denarius of Natta 200/2 As of Natta 200/3 Semis of Natta 201/1 Denarius of C. Scribonius 201/2 As of C. Scribonius 201/4 Triens of C. Scribonius 202/ia Denarius of C. Talna
Hannover, 1516 Rome, Capitol 1131 Paris, A4923 Paris, A4941 BMCRR Rome 761 Paris, A13766 Paris, A13777
ANS BMCRR Rome 735 Paris, A15090 BMCRR Rome 769 BMCRR Rome 771 BMCRR Italy 434 Paris, A12050 Sydenham 117 = BM
202/1 b 203/ia Denarius of C. Maianius 203/2 As of C. Maianius 203/4 Triens of C. Maianius
PLATE XXXIII
204/1 204/2 204/4 205/1 205/2 205/3 206/1 206/7 207/1 208/1 209/1 210/1 210/5 212/1 213/1 213/4 211/1
Denarius of L. Saufeius
BMCRR Rome 834 Cambridge Paris, A15050 Paris, A8548 Paris, A8557 Paris, A8570 BMCRR Rome 674 Vatican 6377 Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 847 BMCRR Rome 724 BMCRR Rome 662 BMCRR Rome 669 Paris, A1966 Paris, A2571 Paris, A2577 Hannover 1834
As of L. Saufeius Triens of L. Saufeius Denarius of P. Sula As of P. Sula Semis of P. Sula Denarius of Safra Uncia of Safra Denarius of Flaus Denarius of Natta Denarius of L. Itius Denarius of C. Iunius Quadrans of C. Iunius As with crescent As with mast and sail Quadrans with mast and sail As of Q. Metellus
PLATE XXXIV
214/ia 2i4/2a
Denarius of M. Atilius Saranus As of M. Atilius Saranus 214/5° Quadrans of M. Atilius Saranus 215/1 Denarius of Q. Marcius Libo 215/28 As of Q. Marcius Libo 215/4 Triens of Q. Marcius Libo 216/1 Denarius of L. Sempronius Pitio 2l6/2b As of L. Sempronius Pitio 2i6/4b Triens of L. Sempronius Pitio 217/1 Denarius of C. Terentius Lucanus
BMCRR Rome 686 BMCRR Rome 693 Paris, A4899 BMCRR Rome 701 Paris, A12183 BMCRR Rome 708 BMCRR Rome 711 Paris, A15178 Paris, A15179 Oxford
770
Key to the plates 217/2 217/3 218/1 219/ia 219/le 219/2 219/3
220/1 221/1 222/1 223/1 224/1 225/1 226/1 a 226/ib 226/2 227/id 228/1 228/2 228/3 229/ia 229/ib 230/1 231/1 231/2 231/3 232/1 232/4 233/1 234/1 234/2a
As of C. Terentius Lucanus Semis of C. Terentius Lucanus Denarius of L. Cupiennius Denarius of C. Antestius
BMUKK Kome 7B4 Rochetta a Volturno hoard BMCRR Rome 852 BMCRR Rome 856 Paris, A4109 Paris, AF Rochetta a Volturno hoard
As of C. Antestius Semis of C. Antestius PLATE Denarius of M. Iunius Denarius of Annius Rufus Anonymous denarius Denarius of C. Curiatius Trigeminus Denarius of L. Iulius Denarius of L. Atilius Nomentanus Denarius of C. Titinius Semis of C. Titinius Denarius of M. Aufidius Rusticus Denarius of C. Valerius Flaccus Semis of C. Valerius Flaccus Denarius of M. Aurelius Cota Denarius of A. Spurilius Denarius of C. Renius Semis of C. Renius Quadrans of C. Renius Denarius of Cn. Gellius Quadrans of Cn. Gellius Denarius of P. Paetus Denarius of Ti. Veturius Quadrans of Ti. Veturius
XXXV
Paris, A F Paris, A4985 Masera hoard 385 Birmingham BMCRR Rome 900 Paris, A4945 BMCRR Rome 907 BMCRR Rome 909 Hannover 1866 BMCRR Rome 925 BMCRR Rome 903 BMCRR Rome 881 Paris, A15941 ANS BMCRR Rome 917 BMCRR Rome 912 Oxford Naples 113863 Hannover 1857 (obv.), 1856 (rev.) BMCRR Rome 919 BMCRR Rome 923 BMCRR Rome 877 BMCRR Italy 550 Copenhagen (obv.), Hannover 2207 (rev.)
PLATE XXXVI BMCRR Rome 927 235/ic Denarius of Sex. Pompeius Hague Quadrans of Sex. Pompeius 235/3 Masera hoard 646 236/ia Denarius of M. Baebius Tampilus 236/ie BMCRR Rome 936 237/ia Denarius of Cn. Lucretius Trio BMCRR 934 Denarius of L. Antestius Gragulus 238/1 BMCRR 977 2 3 8/ 3 b Quadrans of L. Antestius Gragulus Hannover 2014 2 3 8/ 3 f Paris, A4132 BMCRR Italy 540 Denarius of C. Serveilius 239/1 Quadrans of C. Serveilius Turin 239/3 240/ia Denarius of C. Curiatius Trigeminus Paris, A9028 Masera hoard 753 240/1 b Copenhagen 240/28 Semis of C. Curiatius Trigeminus Glasgow 241/ib Denarius of L. Trebanius Triens of L. Trebanius Copenhagen 241/3 Denarius of C. Augurinus BMCRR Rome 953 242/1 Triens of C. Augurinus BM 242/3 Denarius of Ti. Minucius Augurinus Glasgow 243/1 771
Key to 243/3 244/1 244/3 245/1 245/3 246/1
Tnens of Ti. Minucius Augurinus Denarius of C. Aburius Geminus Quadrans of C. Aburius Geminus Denarius of M. Marcius Quadrans of M. Marcius Denarius of C. Numitorius
246/5 247/1 247/3 248/1 284/4 249/1 249/4 250/1 250/2 251/1 251/3 252/1 253/1 253/3 254/1 255/1 255/2 256/1 256/23 256/2b 257/1 257/2 258/1 259/1
Sextans of C. Numitorius Denarius of P. Calpurnius Quadrans of P. Calpurnius Denarius of L. Minucius Quadrans of L. Minucius Denarius of P. Maenius Antiaticus Uncia of P. Maenius Antiaticus Denarius of M. Aburius Geminus Quadrans of M. Aburius Geminus Semis of M. Fabrinius Quadrans of M. Fabrinius Denarius of L. Postumius Albinus Denarius of L. Opeimius Quadrans of L. Opeimius Denarius of M. Opeimius Denarius of M. Acilius Semis of M. Acilius Denarius of Q. Metellus Semis of Q. Metellus
BMCRR Rome 1007 BMCRR Rome 999 Paris, A3739 BMCRR Rome 1008 BMCRR 1018 BMCRR Rome 971
PLATE XXXVII
Denarius of M. Vargunteius Semis of M. Vargunteius Denarius of Sex. Iulius Caisar Denarius of Q. Pilipus
Paris, A13307 BMCRR Rome 969 Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 963 Paris, A12974 BMCRR Rome 988 Paris, A12032 BMCRR Rome 996 Oxford BM
BMCRR Rome 983 BMCRR Rome 1130 BMCRR Rome 1133 Birmingham BMCRR Rome 1139 Cambridge BMCRR Rome 1120 BMCRR Rome 1053 Paris, A5243 Copenhagen BMCRR Rome 1069 Oxford Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 1143
PLATE XXXVIII
260/1 261/1 261/2 261/4 262/1 262/4 263/ia 263/53 264/1 264/2 265/1 265/3 266/1 266/2 266/3 267/1 267/2 268/ib 269/1
Denarius of T. Cloulius Denarius of Cn. Domitius Semis of Cn. Domitius Quadrans of Cn. Domitius Anonymous denarius Anonymous quadrans Denarius of M. Metellus Quadrans of M. Metellus Denarius of C. Serveilius Semis of C. Serveilius Denarius of Q. Maximus Quadrans of Q. Maximus Denarius of C. Cassius Dodrans of C. Cassius Bes of C. Cassius Denarius of T. Quinctius Semis of T. Quinctius Denarius of N. Fabius Pictor Denarius of C. Metellus
BMCRR Rome 1180 BMCRR Rome 1025 BMCRR Rome 1028 BMCRR Rome 1031 BMCRR Rome 1044 Paris, A5162 BMCRR Rome 1145 Oxford Oxford Paris, A15278 BMCRR Rome 1157 Paris, A9432 Licodia hoard Copenhagen Copenhagen BMCRR Rome 1040 BMCRR Rome 1042 Masera hoard 783 BMCRR Rome 1182 772
Key to the plates 269/4 270/1 271/1 271/2
Quadrans of C. Metellus Denarius of M. Porcius Laeca Denarius of Mn. Acilius Balbus Semis of Mn. Acilius Balbus
272/1 272/2 273/1 273/2 274/1 2 74/3 275/1 275/2 276/1 277/1 277/2 278/1 278/2 279/1 279/2 280/1 281/1 282/4 283/ia 284/ib 285/1 285/2 285/5b 286/1
Anonymous semis Anonymous quadrans Denarius of Q. Fabius Labeo Quadrans of Q. Fabius Labeo Denarius of C. Cato Quadrans of C. Cato Denarius of M. Fannius Semis of M. Fannius Denarius of M. Carbo Denarius of Q. Minucius Rufus Quadrans of Q. Minucius Rufus Denarius of C. Plutius Quadrans of C. Plutius Denarius of Carbo Quadrans of Carbo Denarius of M. Tullius Denarius of M. Fourius Philus Denarius of L. Pomponius Denarius of Q. Marcius, etc. Denarius of M. Calidius, etc. Denarius of Cn. Domitius Denarius of Q. Curtius, M. Silanus Quadrans of Cn. Domitius, etc. Denarius of M. Sergius Silus
BMCRR Rome 1184 BMCRR Rome 1023 BMCRR Rome 1019 Rome, Capitol 888
PLATE XXXIX
Turin Hannover 1008 BMCRR Italy 494 Hannover 1931 BMCRR Italy 461 Rome, Capitol 2496 BMCRR Italy 468 Turin BMCRR Italy 473 BMCRR Italy 464 Rome, Capitol 2203 BMCRR Italy 454 Paris, A14086 BMCRR Italy 449 Berlin BMCRR Italy 504 BMCRR Italy 555 BMCRR Rome 1191 BMCRR Italy 480 BMCRR Italy 477 BMCRR Italy 492 BMCRR Italy 485 (obv.), 488 (rev.) Copenhagen BMCRR Italy 517
PLATE XL
287/1 Anonymous denarius 288/1 Denarius of Cethegus 289/1 Denarius of M. Cipius 289/4 Quadrans of M. Cipius 290/1 Denarius of C. Fonteius 290/3 Semis of C. Fonteius 291/1 Denarius of Mn. Aemilius Lepidus 292/1 Denarius of P. Nerva 292/4b Quadrans of P. Nerva 293/1 Denarius of L. Philippus 293/2 Quadrans of L. Philippus 294/1 Denarius of T. Deidius 295/1 Denarius of L. Torquatus 296/ia Denarius of Cn. Blasio 296/ih 296/4 Quadrans of Cn. Blasio 296/2 As of Cn. Blasio 297/1 b Denarius of Ti. Q 298/1 Denarius of L. Caesius 299/ia Denarius of Ap. Claudius, T. Manlius
BMCRR Italy 565 Paris, AF BMCRR Italy 522 Hannover 2196 BMCRR Italy 599 Turin BMCRR Italy 590 Corpus Christi College, Cambridge Rome, Capitol 2003 BMCRR Italy 532 Paris, A12461 (obv.) A12463 (rev.) Oxford BMCRR Italy 519 BMCRR Italy 620 BMCRR Italy 631 Copenhagen Cambridge (see also Quadras y Ramon 258) BMCRR Italy 571 BMCRR Italy 585 BMCRR Rome 1291
773
Key to the plates Cordova hoard BM 1926-10-2-32 (obv.), BMCRR Italy 651 (rev.)
300/1 301/1
Denarius of C. Pulcher Denarius of P. Laeca
302/1 303/1 304/1 305/1 305/2 306/1 307/1 a 307/ib 308/ib 308/3 3o8/4a 3o8/4b 308/5 309/1 310/1 311/id 312/1 312/2 313/ic 313/2 313/3 313/4
Denarius of L. Flaminius Cilo Denarius of Mn. Aquillius Denarius of L. Memmius Denarius of Q. Lutatius Cerco Uncia of Q. Lutatius Cerco Denarius of L. Valerius Flaccus Denarius of Mn. Fonteius
PLATE XLI
Denarius of M. Herennius Quadrans of M. Herennius Uncia of M. Herennius Semuncia of M. Herennius Denarius of A. Manlius Denarius of Cn. Cornelius Sisena Denarius of L. Scipio Asiagenus Denarius of C. Sulpicius As of C. Sulpicius Denarius of L. Memmius As of L. Memmius Semis of L. Memmius Quadrans of L. Memmius
Paris, A9619 Oxford BMCRR Italy 643 BMCRR Italy 636 Copenhagen BMCRR Italy 647 BMCRR Rome 1230 BMCRR Rome 1208 BMCRR Rome 1259 Paris, A10250 Vatican 6673 Rome, Capitol 1557 Rome, Capitol 1558 BMCRR Italy 510 Paris, AF Vienna Oxford Bf. i, pi. xi, 257 (not illustrated here) Oxford Vatican 6804 Rome, Capitol 2187 Rome, Capitol 2188
PLATE XLII
314/id Denarius of L. Cota 315/1 Uncia of L. Hostilius Tubulus 315/2 Semuncia of L. Hostilius Tubulus 316/1 var. Denarius of L. Thorius Balbus 316/2 Semuncia of L. Thorius Balbus 317/1 Denarius of L. Saturninus 3i7/3b 318/ia Denarius of C. Coilius Caldus 319/1 Denarius of Q. Thermus 320/1 Denarius of L. Iulius Caesar 321/1 Denarius of L. Cassius Caeicianus 322/ib Denarius of C. Fabius 322/2 As of C. Fabius 323/1 Denarius of L. Iulius 324/1 Denarius of M. Lucilius Rufus 325/ia Denarius of L. Sentius 326/1 Denarius of C. Fundanius 326/2 Quinarius of C. Fundanius 327/1 Denarius of M. Serveilius 328/1 Denarius of P. Servilius Rullus 329/1 b Denarius of Lentulus Marcelli f. 330/ib Denarius of Piso, Caepio
BMCRR Rome 1312 Paris, AF Rome, Capitol Vienna 3921 Vatican 7004 BM 1950-10-6-305 BMCRR Rome 1532 Paris, A7924 BM (Clark) Oxford BMCRR Rome 1738 BM 1949-4-3-31 Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 1679 BMCRR Rome 1614 BMCRR Rome 1645 Oxford BMCRR Rome 1699 BMCRR Rome 1662 BMCRR Rome 1674 ANS BMCRR Rome 1218
774
Key to the plates PLATE XLIII
329/2 331/i 332/lb 333/1 334/1 334/3b 335/ib 335/3C 335/3f 335/9 335/iob 336/ib 337/ia 337/2d 337/2e 337/2f 337/3 337/4 337/5 335/5b
As of Lentulus Marcelli f. Quinarius of P. Sabinus Quinarius of T. Cloulius Quinarius of C. Egnatuleius Denarius of L. Pomponius Molo Semis of L. Pomponius Molo Denarius of C. Malleolus etc. Denarius of C. Malleolus
338/1 339/ia 340/1 340/1 340/23 340/2C 340/3a 340/4 34i/i 341/2 341/3 34i/4a 341/5 341/6 341/7 342/1 342/2 342/3a 342/3b 342/5b 342/5b 342/5b 342/5b
As with L.P.D.A.P. Anonymous as Denarius of L. Piso Frugi
342/6a 342/7b 342/93 343/ia
Denarius of C. Vibius Pansa As of C. Vibius Pansa Quadrans of C. Vibius Pansa Denarius of M. Cato
Denarius of A. Albinus Denarius of C. Allius Bala Denarius of D. Silanus
Sestertius of D . Silanus As of D . Silanus Semis of C. Malleolus
Corpus Christi College, Cambridge BMCRR Rome 1565 BMCRR Rome 1102 BMCRR Rome 1077 BMCRR Italy 735 BMCRR Italy 741 BMCRR Italy 731 BMCRR Italy 700 BMCRR Italy 703 BMCRR Italy 716 BMCRR Italy 722 BMCRR Rome 1744 Haeberlin 1359 Paris, AF Oxford ANS, HSA 24799 Carbonara hoard Berlin BMCRR Rome 1857 BMCRR Italy 710
PLATE XLIV
Quinarius of L. Piso Frugi Sestertius of L. Piso Frugi As of L. Piso Frugi Denarius of Q. Titius Quinarius of Q. Titius As of Q. Titius Semis of Q. Titius Triens of Q. Titius Quadrans of Q. Titius Denarius of C. Vibius Pansa Style A-c Style A Style c Style B Style D Style E
Bonazzi 357 (not illustrated here) BMCRR Rome 2195 BMCRR Rome 1862 BM 1949-4-3-153 BMCRR Rome 2176 Paris, A6301 BMCRR Rome 2177 Oslo BMCRR Rome 2220 BMCRR Rome 2226 BMCRR Rome 2229 BMCRR Rome 2231 Paris, A15613 Rome, Capitol 2810 Rome, Capiicol 2811 BMCRR Rome 2310 BMCRR Rome 2309 BMCRR Rome 2242 BMCRR Rome 2241 BM 1926-10-2-28 BMCRR Rome 2251 Pontecorvo hoard 1209 Paris, A16228
PLATE XLV
BMCRR Rome 2308 Oxford BMCRR Rome 2321 ANS
775
Key to the plates 343/20 344/ia 344/2C 344/3 344/4d 344/6 345/1 345/2 345/3 345/4a 346/ia 346/2a 346/3 348/1 348/2 348/3
Quinarius of M. Cato Denarius of L. Titurius Sabinus
BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR Berlin BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BM BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR Oxford BMCRR
As of L. Titurius Sabinus Triens of L. Titurius Sabinus Denarius of Cn. Lentulus Quinarius of Cn. Lentulus As of Cn. Lentulus Semis of Cn. Lentulus Denarius of C. Censorinus As of C. Censorinus Denarius of L. Rubrius Dossenus
Italy 693 Rome 2323 Rome 2327 Rome 2330 Rome 2361 Rome 2440 Rome 2443 Rome 2445 Rome 2383 Rome 2414 Rome 2420 Rome 2449 Rome 2458
PLATE XLVI
348/4 348/5 348/6 349/1 35OA/ie 350A/2 35OA/3a 350B/3C
351/1 352/ia 352/ib 352/ic 353/ia 353/id 353/2 353/3 354/1 354/2
Quinarius of L. Rubrius Dossenus As of L. Rubrius Dossenus
Crawford BMCRR Rome 2461 BM 1931-4-8-4 BMCRR Rome 2428 BMCRR Rome 2620 BMCRR Rome 2624 Cambridge Paris, A10012 BM 1926-10-2-23
Denarius of L. C. Memies Denarius of Gargonius etc. Anonymous denarius As of Gargonius etc. Anonymous quadrans Denarius of M. Fannius, L. Critonius Denarius of L. Iulius Bursio
BMCRR Rome 2501 BMCRR Rome 2603 BMCRR Rome 2549 BMCRR Rome 2476 BMCRR Rome 2482 ANS BMCRR Rome 2484 BM (Clark) BMCRR Rome 2470
Denarius of Mn. Fonteius
As of Mn. Fonteius Denarius of C. Licinius Macer As of C. Licinius Macer
PLATE XLVII
355/ie As of L. Salinator, C. Cassius 356/ia Denarius of P. Fourius Crassipes 357/ia Denarius of C. Norbanus 357/lb Denarius of Laterensis 358/1 Aureus of L. Sulla 359/1 Denarius of L. Sulla 359/2 360/ib Denarius of P. Crepusius etc. 361/K Denarius of P. Crepusius Denarius of C. Mamilius Limetanus 362/1 363/ia Denarius of L. Censorinus 364/ld Denarius of Q. Antonius Balbus 365/lc Denarius of C. Valerius Flaccus 366/ia Denarius of C. Annius
Turin, F3989 BMCRR Rome 2604 BMCRR Rome 2827 BMCRR Rome 2782 Berlin BMCRR East 1 BMCRR East 4 BMCRR Rome 2646 BMCRR Rome 2670 BMCRR Rome 2728 BMCRR Rome 2663 BMCRR Rome 2750 BMCRR Gaul 4 Oxford
776
Key to the plates BMCRR Spain 26 BMCRR Spain 32 Cambridge Pontecorvo hoard 672 Glasgow BMCRR East 12 Hague (22.47 gr- - obv.), (14.75 rev.)
366/2a 366/4 367/i 367/2 367/5 368/1
Denarius of L. Manlius Aureus of L. Manlius Denarius of L. Manlius As of L. Sulla
PLATE XLVIII 369/1 370/ia 372/1 372/2 373/ib 374/1 374/2 375/1 375/2 376/1 377/1 377/1 377/1 377/1 377/1 377/1 378/ic 379/1 379/2 380/1 381/ia 382/ib 382/ib
Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius
of of of of
M. Metellus C. Serveilius Q. Maximus A. Postumius Albinus
Anonymous quinarius Denarius of Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Aureus with Q Denarius with Q Denarius with EX.S.C Denarius of L. Volumnius Strabo
Denarius of C. Marius Capito Denarius of L. Procilius Denarius of C. Poblicius Aureus of A. Manlius Denarius of C. Naevius Balbus
BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR Oxford Oxford
Rome Rome Rome Rome Rome
1148 1168 1154 2836 2842
BMCRR Spain 49 Paris, AF Naples, S6511 BMCRR Rome 2892 Berlin Berlin BMCRR Rome 3142 BMCRR Rome 3144 Haeberlin 2589 Paris, A16965 BM 1950-10-6-323 BMCRR Rome 3148 BMCRR Rome 3151 BMCRR Rome 2901 Vatican 2350 Paris, A13074 BMCRR Rome 2930
PLATE XLIX
383/1 384/1 385/1 385/2 385/3 385/4 385/5 386/1 387/1 388/ib 388/ib 389/1 390/1 390/2 391/ia 391/2
Denarius of Ti. Claudius Denarius of L. Papius Denarius of M. Volteius
Denarius of L. Cassius Denarius of L. Rutilius Flaccus Denarius of P. Satrienus Denarius of L. Rustius Denarius of L. Lucretius Trio Denarius of C. Egnatius Maxsumus
Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3207 Cambridge Oxford Pontecorvo hoard 983 BMCRR Rome 3222 Cambridge Cambridge Oxford Oslo BMCRR Rome 3278 (obv.), 3283 (rev.)
777
Key to the plates 39i/3 392/ib 393/ia 394/ia 394/ia 395/1 396/ib 397/1
Oxford Cambridge Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3238 Cambridge BMCRR Rome 3316 BMCRR Rome 3329
Denarius of L. Farsulcius Mensor Denarius of Cn. Lentulus Denarius of C. Postumius Denarius of L. Cossutius Sabula Denarius of L. Plaetorius Denarius of P. Lentulus
PLATE L
398/1 399/ia 400/ia 401/1 401/1 402/ lb 403/1 404/1 405/lb 405/2 4O5/3b 405/43 405/5 406/1 407/1 407/2 408/ia 408/ib 409/1 409/2 410/1 410/8 411/ib 412/1
Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius
of Q. Pomponius Rufus of Q. Crepereius Rocus of L. Axsius Naso of Mn. Aquillius
Aureus of Magnus Denarius of Kalenus, Cordus Denarius of T. Vettius Sabinus Denarius of M. Plaetorius Cestianus
Denarius of P. Galba Denarius of C. Hosidius Geta Denarius of C. Piso Frugi Denarius of M. Plaetorius Cestianus Denarius of Q. Pomponius Musa Denarius of L. Torquatus Denarius of L. Roscius Fabatus
BMCRR Rome 3333 BMCRR Rome 3337 BMCRR Rome 3353 Oxford Rome, Capitol 1112 BMCRR East 20 Oxford BMCRR Rome 3370 Cambridge ANS Oxford Glasgow Cambridge Cambridge BMCRR Rome 3386 Cambridge Cambridge Paris, A6668 Oxford Cambridge BMCRR Rome 3604 Oxford Cambridge Oxford
PLATE LI
413/1 414/1 415/1 416/ia 417/13 418/1 4i9/2b 419/ic 419/2 4i9/3b 420/ia 420/23 421/1 422/lb 423/1 424/1 425/1
Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius
Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius Denarius
BMCRR Rome 3931 Cambridge Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3637 Oxford Rome, Capitol 954 of M. Lepidus BMCRR Rome 3648 BMCRR Rome 3652 Cambridge of P. Ypsaeus Cambridge Oxford of Sufenas of M. Scaurus, P. Hypsaeusi Glasgow Cambridge of C. Serveilius Oxford of C. Considius Nonianus Cambridge of Philippus of Longinus of L. Furius Brocchus of Paullus Lepidus of Libo of Paullus Lepidus, Libo of M. Piso
778
Key to the plates Oxford BMCRR Rome 3828 Cambridge Oxford
426/1 Denarius of Faustus 426/2 426/3 426/40 A Bronze of Amisus 427/1 Denarius of C. Memmius 427/2
BM Oxford
Oxford PLATE L I I
Rome, Capitol 3003 Oxford
428/3 428/2 428/1 429/1 429/2a 430/1 431/1 432/1
433/1 433/2 434/1 434/2 435/1 436/1 437/ia 437/2a
Denarius of P. Fonteius Capito Denarius of P. Crassus Denarius of A. Plautius Denarius of Cn. Plancius
Denarius of Messala
Oxford Oxford Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge Oxford
Denarius of L. Vinicius
Oxford
Denarius of Caldus
Cambridge
Denarius of Brutus Denarius of Q. Pompeius Rufus
Oxford
Denarius 439/1 Denarius 440/1 Denarius 441/1 Denarius 442/ia Denarius 443/1 Denarius 444/1 a Denarius 444/ia 438/1
BMCRR Rome 3868 Cambridge Oxford
Denarius of Q. Cassius
of of of of of of of
Ser. Sulpicius Marcellinus Q. Sicinius Nerius Mn. Acilius Caesar Q. Sicinius, C. Coponius
Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford Oxford
PLATE LIII
444/IC
Denarius of Q. Sicinius, C. Coponius BMCRR East 30
445/ia
Denarius of L. Lentulus, C.
Oxford
Marcellus Oxford Oxford
445/2 445/3° 446/1 Denarius of Cn. Piso 447/ia Denarius of Varro 448/ia Denarius of L. Hostilius Saserna
Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3989
448/23
Oxford
448/3 449/ib Denarius of C. Vibius Pansa 449/2 449/3a 449/4 449/5 Sestertius of C. Vibius Pansa 450/ia Denarius of Albinus Bruti f. 450/3b 450/2
Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3973 Oxford BMCRR Rome 3986 Oxford Oxford Oxford
779
0
Key to the plates 451/1 452/2 452/3 452/4 452/5 453/ic 454/1 454/2 454/3
Denarius of C. Pansa, Albinus Bruti f. Denarius of Caesar Quinarius of Caesar Denarius of Caesar
Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 3961 BMCRR Rome 3959 BMCRR Rome 3960 Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 4002 Paris, A12635
Denarius of L. Plautius Plancus Denarius of A. Licinius Nerva Quinarius of A. Licinius Nerva
PLATE LIV
454/4 455/ia 455/2a 455/3 455/4 455/5 455/6 456/ia 457/1 458/1 459/1 460/2 460/3 460/4 461/1 461/1 462/ib 462/2 463/ia 463/2 463/3 463/4b 463/53 463/68 464/1 464/2 464/3a
Sestertius of A. Licinius Nerva Denarius of C. Antius Restio Quinarius of C. Antius Restio Sestertius of C. Antius Restio Aureus of Caesar Denarius of A. Allienus Denarius of Caesar Denarius of Q. Metellus Pius Scipio Denarius of Q. Metellus Pius Scipio Denarius of Q. Metellus Scipio Denarius of M. Cato Quinarius of M. Cato Denarius of Mn. Cordius Rufus Quinarius of Mn. Cordius Rufus Sestertius of Mn. Cordius Rufus Denarius of T. Carisius
BMCRR Rome 4003 BMCRR Rome 4030 BMCRR Rome 4032 BMCRR Rome 4033 BMCRR Rome 4034 Paris, A4150 BMCRR Rome 4036 BMCRR East 36 BMCRR Sicily 1 Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Africa 6 BMCRR Africa 8 Oxford Oxford Oxford ANS, HSA 10500 Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 4044 BMCRR Rome 4048 Berlin 986/1920 Oxford BMCRR Rome 4058 Oxford
PLATE LV
464/4 464/5 464/6 464/78 464/8a 465/ia 465/23 465/3 465/4 465/5 465/7b 465/83
Quinarius of T. Carisius Sestertius of T. Carisius Denarius of C. Considius Paetus
Quinarius of C. Considius Paetus Sestertius of C. Considius Paetus
Oxford Oxford Paris, A7108 Berlin 205/1917 BMCRR Rome 4077 Oxford BMCRR Rome 4084 BMCRR Rome 4088 BMCRR Rome 4090 BMCRR Rome 4091 BMCRR Rome 4095 BMCRR Rome 4097 780
Key to the plates 466/1 467/ia 468/1 468/2 469/ia 470/ia 470/ib 470/ic 471/1 472/1 472/2 472/3 472/4C 473/3 473/4
Aureus of A. Hirtius Denarius of Caesar Denarius of Caesar
473/1 473/1
Denarius of Palicanus
474/ib 474/2a 474/3a 474/4 474/5 474/6 474/7 475/ia 476/ia 477/1 b 477/2 480/1 478/ia 479/1 48o/2a 48o/2b 480/3
Denarius of L. Valerius Acisculus
480/4 48o/5b 480/6 48o/7b 480/8 480/9 480/14 480/15 480/17 480/18 480/19 480/20 480/21 480/22
Denarius of L. Aemilius Buca Denarius of P. Sepullius Macer Denarius of L. Aemilius Buca
Denarius of M. Poblicius Denarius of M. Minatius Sabinus
As of Cn. Magnus Denarius of L. Papius Celsus Quinarius Sestertius Quinarius Sestertius
of of of of
L. Papius Celsus L. Papius Celsus Palicanus Palicanus
Oxford Oxford Oxford BMCRR Spain 87 BMCRR Spain 72 Oxford BMCRR Spain 80 Naples, F2060 BMCRR Spain 84 Oxford Oxford BMCRR Rome 4025 Berlin 654/1912 BMCRR Rome 4016 BMCRR Rome 4017
PLATE LVI
Quinarius of L. Valerius Acisculus Sestertius of L. Valerius Acisculus Aureus of L. Plancus Bronze of C. Clovius Denarius of Sex. Magnus Pius Denarius of L. Aemilius Buca As of Eppius As of Magnus Pius Denarius of M. Mettius
Birmingham Berlin (Sandes) BMCRR Rome Ban Oxford BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome Oxford BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome Oxford BMCRR Spain BMCRR Rome BMCRR Spain BMCRR Spain BMCRR Rome Hague Oxford
4015
4109 4115 4116 4117 4118 4125 94 4161 104 95 4135
PLATE LVII
Oxford Oxford BMCRR '. Rome 4158 BMCRR 1 Rome 4155 Oxford Denarius of P. Sepullius Macer BMCRR 1 Rome 4172 BMCRR Rome 4175 Denarius of C. Cossutius Maridianus Oxford Denarius of M. Mettius Oxford Denarius of P. Sepullius Macer BMCRR Rome 4164 Denarius of C. Cossutius Maridianus Oxford Denarius of P. Sepullius Macer Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 4176 BMCRR Rome 4129
781
Key to the plates 480/23 480/24 480/25 480/26 480/27 480/28 481/1 482/1 483/1 483/2 484/1 485/2
Quinarius of M. Mettius Quinarius of L. Aemilius Buca Quinarius of P. Sepullius Macer Sestertius of L. Aemilius Buca Sestertius of P. Sepullius Macer Sestertius of M. Mettius Aureus of Caesar Denarius of Caesar Denarius of Q. Nasidius Denarius of C. Antonius Denarius of L. Flaminius Chilo
Vienna BMCRR Rome 4162 Berlin Paris, A3937 BMCRR Rome 4183 Paris, A12932 BMCRR Rome 4131 BMCRR Gaul 70 Copenhagen BMCRR Sicily 21 BMCRR East 37 Oxford
PLATI! LVIII
Denarius of L. Flaminius Chilo
Lawrence 485/1 Oxford 485/1 485/1 BMCRR Rome 4202 485/1 Oxford 486/1 Denarius of P. Accoleius Lariscolus BMCRR Rome 4211 Cambridge 487/1 Denarius of Petillius Capitolinus 487/23 Cambridge 488/1 Denarius of M. Antonius BMCRR Gaul 54 489/2 Denarius of M. Antonius, M. Lepidus BMCRR Gaul 31 BMCRR Gaul 36 489/4 Quinarius of M. Antonius BMCRR Gaul 40 489/5 489/6 BMCRR Gaul 49 (obv.), Gaul 50 (rev.) 490/1 Denarius of Octavian BMCRR Gaul 82 490/2 Aureus of Octavian Oxford BMCRR Gaul 64 490/3 Denarius of Octavian 490/4 Hersh 491/ia Aureus of L. Cestius, C. Norbanus BM (Clark) 491/2 BMCRR Rome 4193 492/1 Aureus of M. Antonius BMCRR Gaul 47 492/2 BMCRR Gaul 46 BMCRR Gaul 59 493/ib Aureus of Octavian BMCRR Rome 4259 494/1 Aureus of L. Livineius Regulus 494/23 BMCRR Rome 4255 BMCRR Rome 4254 494/3a Berlin 494/4 Aureus of P. Clodius PLATE LIX
494/5 494/6b 494/7D 494/8b 494/9a 494/10 494/11 494/12 494/13 494/14 494/15
Aureus of P. Clodius Aureus of L. Mussidius Longus Aureus of C. Vibius Varus Aureus of L. Mussidius Longus
BMCRR Rome 4276* Vienna BMCRR Rome 4228 BMCRR Rome 4226 BMCRR Rome 4227 Paris, AF BM 1913-4-10-1 BMCRR Rome 4292 BMCRR Rome 4232 BMCRR Rome 4230 BMCRR Rome 4231 782
Key to the plates 494/16 494/17 494/18 494/19 494/2Oa 494/23 494/24 494/25 494/26a 494/28 494/29 494/30 494/3*
Denarius of P. Clodius
494/32 494/33 494/34 494/35 494/36 494/37 494/38 494/39a 494/40 494/41 494/42C 494/43a 494/443 494/46 495/2a 496/1 496/2 496/3 A 497/1 497/2a 497/3 498/1
Denarius of C.Vibius Varus
Aureus of P. Clodius Denarius of P. Clodius Denarius of L. Livineius Regulus Aureus of L. Livineius Regulus Denarius of L. Livineius Regulus
BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome BMCRR Rome Athens Cambridge Oxford Cambridge
4280 4278 4279 4282
Paris, AF BMCRR Rome 4267 Cambridge Cambridge Cambridge
PLATE LX
BMCRR Rome 4294 Oslo Cambridge
Aureus of C. Vibius Varus
Paris, AF Denarius of C. Vibius Varus Denarius of L. Mussidius Longus
Aureus of L. Mussidius Longus Denarius of M. Lepidus Denarius of M. Antonius
Bronze of Buthrotum Aureus of Octavian Denarius of Octavian Aureus of C. Cassius
Cambridge Oxford BMCRR Rome 4304 Cambridge Cambridge BMCRR Rome 4236 Cambridge Cambridge BMCRR Rome 4233 Cambridge BMCRR Africa 30 BMCRR Gaul 60 BMCRR Gaul 88 BM 1904-2-3-22 Oxford BMCRR Gaul 95 BMCRR Gaul 77 Oxford BMCRR East 71
PLATE LXI
500/1 500/3 500/6 501/1 502/1 502/3 502/4 503/1 504/1 505/1 505/3 505/5 506/1
Denarius of C. Cassius Aureus of Brutus Denarius of Brutus Aureus of Brutus Quinarius of Brutus Denarius of Brutus Aureus of C. Cassius Denarius of C. Cassius Denarius of Brutus Aureus of Brutus
BMCRR East Oxford Paris, AF Oxford Paris, AF BMCRR East Cambridge BMCRR East BMCRR East BM (Clark) BMCRR East BM BMCRR East
783
79
46 53 55 84 58
Key to the plates 506/2
Denarius of Brutus 506/3 Quinarius of Brutus 507/ib Aureus of Brutus 507/2 Denarius of Brutus 508/1 Aureus of Brutus Denarius of Brutus 508/3 509/2 Denarius of Q. Cornuficius
Cambridge Cambridge BMCRR East 62 Paris, A n 569 Paris, AF BMCRR East 68 BMCRR Africa 26
509/4 509/5 510/1 511/1
Berlin 698/1911
BMCRR Africa 27 BMCRR East 86 BMCRR Sicily 14
Denarius of Murcus Aureus of Sex. Pompeius
PLATE LXII
511/20 5ii/3a 511/4C 512/1 513/1 513/2
513/3 5H/1 514/2 515/1 515/2 516/1 5i6/3 516/4
517/ia 5i7/4a 517/5C 517/8 518/1 518/2 519/1 519/2 520/1 521/1
Denarius of Sex. Pompeius
Oxford Oxford Oxford
Aureus of C. Clodius Vestalis Aureus of M. Arrius Secundus Denarius of M. Arrius Secundus
Denarius of M. Antonius
BMCRR Rome 4195 BMCRR Rome 4209 BMCRR Rome 4210 Rome, Capitol 1117 BMCRR Rome 4215 BMCRR Rome 4216 BMCRR Rome 4204 BMCRR Rome 4205 BMCRR Gaul 69 Berlin
Aureus of M. Antonius Aureus of M. Antonius
BMCRR Gaul 65 BMCRR East 98
Aureus of C. Numonius Vaala Denarius of C. Numonius Vaala Aureus of L. Servius Rufus Denarius of L. Servius Rufus Aureus of M. Antonius
BMCRR East 106 Oxford BMCRR East 109
Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of Octavian
BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR BMCRR
Aureus of Cn. Domitius Denarius of Cn. Domitius Denarius of M. Antonius Aureus of M. Antonius
Gaul 85 Gaul 80 East 93 East 94 East 114 East 111
PLATE LXIII
Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of Octavian 524/2 Denarius of Q. Labienus Parthicus Aureus of Ti. Sempronius Graccus 525/1 525/40 Denarius of Ti. Sempronius Graccus 526/1 Aureus of Q. Voconius Vitulus 526/2 Denarius of Q. Voconius Vitulus Aureus of M. Antonius 527/1 528/ib Aureus of M. Antonius 528/3 Denarius of M. Antonius 529/1 Aureus of Octavian 529/2C Denarius of Octavian 522/4
523/ia
529/3 529/40
Quinarius of Octavian
Cambridge Cambridge BMCRR East 132 BMCRR Rome 4313 Oxford Oxford Oxford Berlin BMCRR East 120 BMCRR East 123 BMCRR Gaul 91 BMCRR Gaul 92 BMCRR Gaul 94 BMCRR East 130
784
Key to the plates 530/1 531/la 532/1 533/2 533/3a 534/1 534/2 534/3 535/1 535/2
As of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of Domitius Denarius of M. Antonius Aureus of M. Antonius Aureus of Octavian Denarius of Octavian
536/4 537/1 537/2 538/1 538/1 538/2 539/1 540/1 541/1 541/2 542/1 542/2 543/1 544/12 545/1 546/2a 546/1 546/4 546/6 546/8 548/ia 549/1 550/1 55O/2d
Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of Octavian
Bronze of Octavian
Willers, pi. x, 1 (not illustrated here) BMCRR Gaul 73 BMCRR Spain 109 Cambridge BMCRR East 144 BMCRR Gaul 102 BMCRR Gaul 101 Oxford Oxford Willers, pi. ix, 10 (not illustrated here) PLATE LXIV
Denarius of Octavian
Denarius of M. Antonius Aureus of Octavian Aureus of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of M. Antonius Denarius of Scarpus
Quinarius of Scarpus Gold stater of T. Quinctius Gold stater of Cn. Lentulus Bronze of Q. Oppius
BMCRR East 147 BMCRR Gaul 113 BMCRR Gaul 115 BMCRR Gaul 116 BMCRR Gaul 118 Mazzini BMCRR East 172 BMCRR Africa 32 BMCRR East 173 BMCRR East 174 BMCRR East 176 Crawford BMCRR East 181 BMCRR East 185 BMCRR East 227 BMCRR Cyrenaica 3 Oxford BMCRE Augustus 690 BMCRE Augustus 689 BMCRE Augustus 688 BM BMCRR Spain 61 Bf. iii, pi. v, 145 (not illustrated here) Oxford
PLATE LXV
1 Hannover 2431 (specific gravity 10.57) 2 Hannover 2432 3 JNG 1967, pi. 6, no. 7 4 Maccarese: hoard 1082 5 BM (see Addenda)
PLATE LXVI Control-marks on denarii of L. Papius I here illustrate all combinations of control-marks known to me; I think the list is nearly complete. I should like to stress the fact that supplements to this list must be published with a photograph or drawing in order to be of any use. 1. Grueber i=Babelon 19 2. Grueber 2
Amphora/Amphora Amphora/Hydria
785
Key to the plates
434445-
Grueber 3 =:Babelon24 Grueber 4 =:Babelon 94 Grueber 5 Gruebcr 6 == Babelon 37 Grueber 7 == Babelon 42 Grueber 8 =: Babelon 93 Grueber 9 =: Babelon 5 Grueber to (misdrawn) Grueber 11 (misdrawn) Grueber 12 =Babelon 83 Grueber 13 = Babelon 35 Grueber 14 = Babelon 78 Grueber 15 Grueber 16 = Babelon 129 Grueber 17 Grueber 18 = Babelon 7 Grueber 19 = Babelon 100 Grueber 20 = Babelon 70 Grueber 21 = Babelon 81 Grueber 22 = Babelon 60 Grueber 23 = Babelon 4 Grueber 24 = Babelon 103 Grueber 25 = Babelon 84 Grueber 26• = Babelon 36 Grueber 27 Grueber 28 Grueber 29 • = Babelon 141 Grueber 30 Grueber 31 = Babelon 32 Grueber 32 = Babelon 146 Grueber 33 = Babelon 50 bis (also = 13) Grueber 34 = Grueber 35 Babelon 124 Grueber 36 = Babelon 107 Grueber 37•• = Babelon 89 Grueber 38 = Babelon 45 Grueber 39 (reversed) = Babelon 74 Grueber 40 = Babelon 137 Grueber 41 Grueber 42 Grueber 43 Grueber 44 = Babelon 4 Grueber 45 = Babelon 11 = Babelon 86
46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56.
Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber
3. 456. 78.
910. 11. 12. 13. 14. 1516. 17. 18. 1920. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 2728. 2930. 3132. 33343536. 3738. 39-
40. 41. 42.
46 = Babelon 109 47 = Babelon 138 48 = Babelon 92 49 = Babelon 123 50 51 (misdrawn) = Babelon 98 52 = Babelon 96 53 = Babelon 102 54 55 = Babelon 30 56
Amphora/Amphora stand Anvil/Tongs AplustrelPtovr ?/Hom Basket of fruit/Bowl of fruit Basket/Shopping bag Boot/Shoe Dolium/Hydria Tall cup/Jug Cooking pot/Half carcass Hanging cooking pot/Three hooks Bull's head/Axe Butterfly/Fly
Phrygian cap/Sword Hunter's net/Two spears Sheaf of corn/? Column base/Capital Comb/Hair-pin Comb/? Furnace/Cupel Cornucopiae/Bunch of grapes Crab/Fish Dolium/Round amphora Prawn/Octopus Crocodile/Pig Chisel/Hammer Crov/-bai / Dolabrum Oil-lamp/Oil-lamp Shallow cup/Rhyton Subsellium/Sella ?/? Ball/Whip and hoop Distaff/Two reels Hound/Capricorn Fat fish/Thin fish Plasterer's float/Trowel / Egg/Bird Feather/Peacock's feather Mattock/Tall basket with strap hanging down Two flutes/Pan-pipes Foot/Hand holding surgical instrument Pick-axc/Dolabrum Sack/Water bottle Head of nanny-goat/Head of billy-goat Cup/Wine-jug Cup/? Chopper/Sickle Simpulum/Knife Hand in caestus/Toich Hand holding p/ecrrum/Harp
786
Key to the plates 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89.
Grueber 57 = Babelon 90 Grueber 58 (misdrawn) Grueber 59 = Babelon 43 Grueber 60 Grueber 61 = Babelon 10 Grueber 62 = Babelon 20 Grueber 63 = Babelon 59 Grueber 64 = Babelon 77 Grueber 65 Grueber 66 = Babelon 82 Grueber 67 Grueber 68 = Babelon 46 Grueber 69 = Babelon 2 Grueber 70 = Babelon 61 Grueber 71 = Babelon 128 Grueber 72 Grueber 73 = Babelon 122 Grueber 74 Grueber 75 = Babelon 8 Grueber 76 = Babelon 12 Grueber 77 Grueber 78 = Babelon 140 Grueber 79 = Babelon 121 Grueber 80 = Babelon 101 Grueber 81 = Babelon 91 Grueber 82 Grueber 83 Grueber 84 (misdrawn) = Babelon 17 Grueber 85 = Babelon 64 Grueber 86 = Babelon 132 Grueber 87 = Babelon 40 Grueber 88 = Babelon 14 Grueber 89
90. Grueber 90 = Babelon 21 91. Grueber 91 = Babelon 56 92. Grueber 92 = Babelon 75 93. Grueber 93 = Babelon 28 94. Grueber 94 = Babelon 34 95. Grueber 95 = Babelon 6 96. Grueber 96 = Babelon 44 97. Grueber 97 98. Grueber 98 = Babelon 87 99. Grueber 99 100. Grueber 100 = Babelon 143 101. Grueber 101 = Babelon 73
102. 103. 104. 105. 106.
Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber
102 = Babelon 103 Babelon 104 Babelon 105 Babelon 106 Babelon
39 50 41 142 148
Rabbit/Hound Harp/? Harpa/Diagon's head Helmet/Shield Apex/Culullus Hook for raising timber/PuUey-block Aspergillumj Simpulum Forepart of horse/Forepart of cow Jug/Feather Jug/Cradle Knife/Block Lantern/Tongs Crook/Mask Lock/Key Lotus/Poppy-head Lyre/Quiver ?/? Mirror/Mirror Modius/Modius Owl/Eagle Cooking pan/Cooking pan Pentagram/Set-square Spear/? ?/? Pump/Pail with cup attached Finger-ring/? Rudder/Anchor ?/Sandal Tanner's knife/Scraper Sceptre/Curved sword Sceptre/Radiate crown Whclk-shell/Scallop-shell Shovel for use with bread-oven/Breadoven Sickle/Basket with two handles Sistrum/Bov/\ of fruit Spear/? Spearhead/Deformed foot Spur/Nosebag ?/? Staff with double hook/? Standard/ Snake Funnel/Hydria Sword in scabbard/Carwyx Tablet recording vote for [L.] P[apius] (reference to Lex Papia rightly rejected by Th. Mommsen, RMw, 616, still held by E. Costa, BIDR 1903, 71 n. 8; compare no. 335/3e)/Voting urn Thyrsus/Ivy-branch Seed/Egg Trident/Dolphin Butcher's block/Chopper Tripod/Hanging hydria
787
Key to the plates 107. Grueber 107 = Babelon 115 108. Grueber 108 = Babelon 18 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119.
Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber Grueber
109 110 111= Babelon 112 = Babelon 113 = Babelon 114 = Babelon 115 = Babelon 116 = Babelon H7 = Babelon 118 = Babelon 119 = Babelon
105 58 110 106 79 144 119 126 63
Beetroot/Carrot ?/? Oil-jar/Oil-lamp Water-bottle/Water-bottle Oil-flask/Strigil Writing tablet/Stilus Tap/Water-pipe ?/? Wheel/Wheel Head of lioness/Head of Lion Wreath/L»'rut« Wreath/Torque Bit/Chariot
PLATE LXVII
120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143.
Babelon 1 Babelon 3 Babelon 9 Babelon 15 Babelon 16 Babelon 22 Babelon 23 Babelon 25 Babelon 26 Babelon 27 Babelon 29 Babelon 31 Babelon 33 Babelon 38 Babelon 47 Babelon 49 Babelon 51 Babelon 52 Babelon 53 Babelon 54 Babelon 55 Babelon 57 Babelon 62 Babelon 65
144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151.
Babelon Babelon Babelon Babelon Babelon Babelon Babelon Babelon
66 67 68 69 71 72 149 80
152. Babelon 85 153. Babelon 88
Control-marks on denarii of L. Papius (continued) Square pennant/Spear Pelta/Axe Snake/Dog ?/Flute Pileus/Pileus Fasces /Axe
Palm-branch/Wreath Lyre/Lyre-key Chopper/Scissors
Helmet/Helmet Poppy-head/Poppy-head Plumb-bob/Level ?/Snail Duck's head/Duck's head /4/>/i«fre/Prow-stem
Vine-leaf/Ivy-leaf Shell/Shell Ham/Boar's head }/}
?/Whip Shovel/? ?/? ?/? Headdress of I sis/Headdress of Isis Torch/Goat's head Jug/? Eagle/Thunderbolt Altar/Lighted altar Three hooks/Cooking pot Seed-head/Poppy-head Harpa/Petasus
Caduceus/Wing Stag's head/Stag's head ?/Jug
154 Babelon 95 155 Babelon 97
788
Key to the plates 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192.
Babelon 99 Babelon 104 Babelon 108 Babelon 111 Babelon 112 Babelon 113 Babelon 114 Babelon 116 Babelon 117 Babelon 118 Babelon 120 Babelon 12s Babelon 127 Babelon 130 Babelon 131 Babelon 134 Babelon 135 Babelon 139 Babelon 145 Babelon 147 Babelon 150 Berlin Haeberlin 2017 = Vatican Berlin Pontecorvo hoard 766 Bologna Berlin Haeberlin 1968 Turin, Simboli, 8 Turin, Simboli, 679 Turin, Simboli, 633 Turin, Simboli, 614 Turin, Simboli, 477 Turin, Simboli, 468 Turin, Simboli, 458 Turin, Simboli, 454 Turin, Simboli, 439
193. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209.
Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin, Turin,
Simboli, 438 Simboli, 423 Simboli, 232 Simboli, 225 Simboli, 194 Simboli, 193 Simboli, 180 Simboli, 166 Simboli, 162 Simboli, 119 Simboli, JOO Simboli, 68 Simboli, 58 Simboli, 48 Simboli, 45 Simboli, 36 Simboli, 10
Plough/Yoke ?/Double torch Legionary standard/Altar Stilus/Hand Arrow/Club Plane/Plane Saw/Saw Calipers/Dividers Knife with rounded point/Patera Spear/Winged foot
?/? Corn-ear/Locust Hound's head/Rabbit's head
?/? Comb/Shears Y-shaped stick/Ladder
Jar/? Sword/Helmet Ladle/Tankard ?/Cock
?/? Tankard/Leather bottle
CCXLVI/CCXLVI Bell/Yoke Peahen/Peacock ?/Plane Star/Crescent Crook/Sickle Bucket/Dolabrum Spade/Fork
?/? Bow/Arrow Snake/Frog Spear/Elephant's head Acorn/Hog Ram's head/Jug Large cloven hoof/Small cloven hoof Horse's head/Donkey's head Hen's head/Cock's head ?/? Mask of Pan/Mask of Silenus ?/Bucket Altar/? ?/Cooking pot Loutrophoros/Oil-jar Simpulum/]ug Candelabrum/Oil-lamp Piercer/Shears
?/? Tongs/Hammer Key/Lock
?/? ?/? Bucket/Bu/em
789
Key to the plates 210. Quadras y Ramon 455 211. Babelon 76
Boot/Mask Capital/Head capital Babelon 136 is barbarous
PLATE LXVIII Control-marks on denarii of L. Roscius Fabatus I here illustrate all combinations of control-marks known to me; I do not think the list is as complete as for L. Papius. I should like to stress the fact that supplements to this list must be published with a photograph or drawing to be of any use. The rule that the same obverse die is always paired with the same reverse die is broken in three cases - nos. 72-3, nos. 178-9 and nos. 194-5. Lighted altar/Egg i. Grueber 1 = Babelon 75 2. Grueber 2 Amphora/Amphora stand Amphora/? 3. Grueber 3 = Babelon 35 Axe-head/Dolabrum 4. Grueber 4 (misdrawn) = Babelon 80 Apex/Apex 5. Grueber 5 Four knucklebones/Staff with doubl 6. Grueber 6 = Babelon 32 7. Grueber 7 ?/? 8. Grueber 8 = Babelon 93 Axe/Sceptre 9. Grueber 9 Bucket/Bidens 10. Grueber 10 = Babelon 40 Bee/Flower Bench/ Tessera nummularia 11. Grueber 11 = Babelon 67 12. Grueber 12 = Babelon 82 Cradle/? 13. Grueber 13 Sword/? 14. Grueber 14 = Babelon 87 Shadoof/Well-head Camel/Donkey 15. Grueber 15 = Babelon 56 Sack and coXwnn/Sella 16. Grueber 16 (incomplete) = Babelon 95 ?/Strigil 17. Grueber 17 = Babelon 27 18. Grueber 18 Pileus/Pileus 19. Grueber 19 Radiate crown/Helmet 20. Grueber 20 = Babelon 13 (misdrawn) ?/? 21. Grueber 21 Case for scrolls/? Chair/Altar 22. Grueber 22 = Babelon 89 23. Grueber 23 Modius/Box Bird on box/Bagpipes 24. Grueber 24 = Babelon 117 7/Simpulitm 25. Grueber 25 Column with crescent/Column 26. Grueber 26=Babelon 29 Cornucopiae tied with fillet/Rudder 27. Grueber 27 = Babelon 54 Double cornucopiae/Cornucopiae 28. Grueber 28 = Babelon 46 Bull/Calf 29. Grueber 29 = Babelon 119 Cuirass/Helmet 30. Grueber 30 Curry-comb/Horse's foot 31. Grueber 31 = Babelon 83 Curule chair/Subsellium 32. Grueber 32 = Babelon 111 Squid/Shrimp 33. Grueber 33 ?/Two flutes 34. Grueber 34 35. Grueber 35 ?/? Water-bottle/Amphora with strap 36. Grueber 36 = Babelon 149 Two flutes/Two lyre-keys 37. Grueber 37 = Babelon 77 Goat's head/Duck on column 38. Grueber 38 Fist/? 39. Grueber 39 (reverse uncertain) Single-headed axe/Bipetmis 40. Grueber 40 Head/? 41. Grueber 41 = Babelon 132 Mask/Ham 42. Grueber 42 = Babelon 125 Helmet/Harpa 43. Grueber 43
790
Key to the plates Grueber 44 = Babelon 42 Grueber 45 = Babelon 92 Grueber 46 =Babelon 94 Grueber 47 Grueber 48 = Babelon 55 Grueber 49 =Babelon 138 Grueber 50 (misdrawn) = Babelon 123 Grueber 51 = Babelon 140 Grueber 52 = Babelon 90 Grueber 53 = Babelon 73 Grueber 54 Grueber 55 Grueber 56 Grueber 57 : Babelon 109 Grueber 58 : Babelon 3 Grueber 59 Grueber 60 = Babelon 5 Grueber 61 Grueber 62 = Babelon 45 Grueber 63 : Babelon 63 Grueber 64 Grueber 65 = Babelon 17 Grueber 66 Grueber 67 = Babelon 57 Grueber 68 = Babelon 145 Grueber 69 = Babelon 61 Grueber 70 = Babelon 16 71- Grueber 71 = Babelon 100 72. Grueber 72 = Babelon 76 Milan 1820 73Grueber 74 = Babelon 147 74Grueber 75 = Babelon 91 75-
44. 4546. 474 8. 4950. 5152. 5354555 6. 5758. 596o. 6i. 62. 63. 64. 6566. 67. 68. 69. 70.
76. 7778. 7980. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 9192. 93949596. 97-
Grueber 76 (incomplete) = Babelon 68 Grueber 77 = Babelon 112 Grueber 78 = Babelon 60 Grueber 79 = Babelon 70 Grueber 80 = Babelon 72 San Giuliano hoard Grueber 82 = Babelon 101 Grueber 83 Grueber 84 = Babelon 135 Grueber 85 = Babelon 143 Grueber 86 (incomplete) = Babelon 152 Grueber 87 Grueber 88 Grueber 89 = Babelon 49 Grueber 90 Grueber 91 Grueber 92 Grueber 93 = Babelon 122 Grueber 94 = Babelon 18 Grueber 95 = Babelon 48 Grueber 96 = Babelon 11 Grueber 97 (misdrawn) = Babelon 81
Helmet/Head Helmet/Helmet Helmet/Dagger ?/Cooking-pot Stork/Egg Stork/Bee Headdress of Isis/Peacock Headdress of Isis/Sistrum Jug on bench/Jug on block Jug/Patera Jug/? Key/? Lizard/Tortoise Lyre/Lyre-key Mask/? Shield/Bird Laurel-bran ch/Cup Spade/Rake Quill/Writing tablet Palm-tree/Palm-tree Bowl/Jug Peacock/Crescent Petasus/} Petasus/Petasus Phalerae/} Pygmy with shield/Crane Plane/Plane Cooking-pot/Two hooks Prow-stem/zip/ttttre Scales/Box of weights Wreathed sceptre/Bucket hanging from branch Scorpion/Crab Chopper/Chopper Squid/Fork with four prongs Scissors/Comb Shield/Sword Patera/Torch Shield/? ?/Stool with three legs Stag's head/Stag's head ?/? Chandelier/Oil-lamp Duck on column/Altar Animal standard/Carnyx Stork/? Curved sword/Curved scabbard Thyrsus/Cup ?/? Torque/Ear-rings Tortoise/Lyre Trident/Dolphin Tripod/Lyre Curved trumpet/Straight trumpet
791
Key to the plates 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110.
Grueber 98 (incomplete) = Babelon 108 Grueber 99 = Babelon 30 Grueber 100 Grueber 101= Babelon 4 Grueber 102 Grueber 103 (misdrawn) Grueber 104 = Babelon 15 (misdrawn) Grueber 105 Grueber 106 (misdrawn) Grueber 107 = Babelon 43 Grueber 108 = Babelon 124 Grueber 109 = Babelon 12 Grueber 73
Oil-jar/Loutrophoros Vine-branch/Ivy-branch Vine-leaf/Bunch of grapes Folded writing-tablet/Stilus ?/? Well/? ?/? Sack/Oil-jar ?/? Wing/Palm-branch Wreath/Poppy-head Yoke/Bell Rhyton/Shallow cup
PLATE LXIX
111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146.
Control-marks on denarii of L. Roscius Fabatus {continued) Babelon 1 Wreath/Bird Babelon 2 Standard/Finger-ring Babelon 6 Bird/Two flutes Babelon 7 (misdrawn) Elephant's head/Crown Babelon 8 Sheep's skull/Bucranium Babelon 9 Star/Crescent Babelon 10 Star/Set-square Babelon 14 Forepart of animal/Forepart of animal Babelon 19 Hand holding snake/Hand holding? Babelon 20 ?/? Babelon 21 Wolf's head/? Babelon 22 Scales/Modius Babelon 23 (misdrawn) ?/Bird Babelon 24 Crescent/BipewMij Babelon 25 Hook/Y-shaped stick Babelon 26 Altar/Bird Babelon 28 ?/? Babelon 31 Winged caduceus/? Babelon 33 Trophy/Palm-branch Babelon 34 Right hand/Left hand Babelon 36 Head of billy-goat/Head of nannygoat Babelon 37 Insect/Insect Babelon 38 Dragon's head/Harpa Babelon 39 ?/? Babelon 41 Club/Bow and quiver of arrows Babelon 44 Chicken-coop/Chickens feeding Babelon 47 ?/? Babelon 50 Winged thunderbolt/Thunderbolt Babelon 51 Hand with surgical instrument/Foot Babelon 52 Three sea-horses/Squid Babelon 53 Crocodile/? Babelon 58 Modius/Modius with measure Babelon 59 Horse's head/Donkey's head Babelon 62 ?/Quiver with baldric Babelon 64 Egg/Lotus Babelon 65 Tanner's knife/Piercer and ?
792
Key to the plates 147. Babelon 66 148. Babelon 69 149. Babelon 71 (incomplete) 150. Babelon 74 151. Babelon 79 152. Babelon 84 153. Babelon 85 154. Babelon 86 155. Babelon 88 156. Babelon 96 157. Babelon 97 158. Babelon 98 159. Babelon 99 160. Babelon 102 161. Babelon 103 162. Babelon 104 163. Babelon 105 164. Babelon 106 165. Babelon 107 166. Babelon 110 167. Babelon 113 168. Babelon 114 169. Babelon 115 170. Babelon 116 171. Babelon 118 172. Babelon 120 173. Babelon 121 174. Babelon 126 175. Babelon 127 (misdrawn) 176. Babelon 128 177. Babelon 129 178. Vienna 179. Babelon 130 180. Babelon 133 181. Babelon 134 182. Babelon 136 183. Babelon 137 184. Babelon 139 185. Babelon 141 186. Babelon 142 187. Babelon 144 188. Babelon 146 189. Babelon 148 190. Babelon 150 191. Babelon 151 192. Babelon 154 193. Babelon 155 194. Babelon 153 195. Hague 196. Babelon 131 197. Platt 1930, 1054 198. Bari 199. San Giuliano hoard 200. Brussels 201. Bologna
Snail/? Head of lion/Head of lioness Sea-horse/Sea-horse ?/? Hammer/Piercer ?/Spear Mask/Bag-pipes ?/Arrow Wreath/Scales ?/Tripod Poppy-head/Corn-ear ?/? Sandal/Shoe Sword/Staff ?/? Sickle/Sheaf of corn Harp/? Wreath/? ?/? Hand/? Curry-comb/? ?/? Cooking-pot/? Rabbit/Duck Crescent/? Pegasus/Head of Medusa Head/Bunch of grapes ?/? Dolium/Piercer ?/? Axe/Arrow-head Fish/Large cup Fish/Small cup Mask/Boot Snake in dish/Branch Mask of Pan/Crook ?/Grasshopper Duck on globe/Cup Table-leg/Table-leg Shield/Sword Capstan/? Hoop/Whip Radiate crown/Wreath Spear and axe/? Winged caduceus/Sack Shield/Helmet Butterfly/? Shield/Short sword in scabbard Shield/Long sword in scabbard Seal/Finger-ring Shield/Spear Cup/? Cooking-pot/? Bucket/Bucket
793
Key to the plates 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 215. 216. 217. 218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242.
Athens Athens Bologna Turin, Simboli, 660 ANS, HSA 10493 Bologna Moscow Bologna Hague San Giuliano hoard Haeberlin 2570 Sustinenza hoard Haeberlin 2556 Helbing 20/6/1929, 4065 Turin, Simboli, 717 Moscow Turin, Simboli, 579 Turin, Simboli, 499 Grazzanise hoard Turin, Simboli, 302 Turin, Simboli, 637 Bari Bologna Bologna Bologna Turin, Simboli, 243 Turin, Simboli, 118 Turin, Simboli, 148 Turin, Simboli, 95 Turin, Simboli, 76 Turin, Simboli, 30 Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Madrid Milan 1814
/ Wine-jar/Spade Wreath/? ?/? ?/Lyre-key Chopper/Chopper / Lotus/I vy-branch Limpet/? ?/? ?/Crab ?/? ?/Bird Plumb-bob/? Figure-of-eight shield/Spear Locust/Corn-ear ?/? Hog/? Wheel/? Dolabrum/} DolabrumlStaff / Pan-pipe/P«fam Candelabrum/? Wine-jar/Cup Foot/? Pump/Well-head Modius/Modius Shield/Piercer ?/Tanner's knife Shield/Helmet Hand pointing/? Curved sword/Curved sword Helmet/Helmet Snake on staff/Decempeda Wreath/? Wreath/S Ladder/?
PLATE LXX
Quinarii of L. Piso Frugi l. Knife 2. Spear 3. Sword 4-
56.
Miscellaneous control-marks Denarii of L 7. Strigil ai 8. 910. 11. 12.
794
Key to the plates *314.
Denarii of C. Censorinus 1516. 17i8. 1920.
Denarii of C. Annius 21. Arrow 22. Knife 23. Spear Denarii of C. Marius Capito 24. Altar 25. Flabellum 26. Bit 27. 28.
29. Fibula 30. Fibula 31-
Denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus (405/1) 62. Knife 63. Knife Denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus (405/3-4) 64. Cup 65. Dagger 66. Vase with strap 67. Tall vase Denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus (405/5) 68. Arrow 69. (Not used) 70. Arrow 71. Hanging fruit 72. Pail with lid and strap 73. Spear downwards 747576. 7778. 79-
Denarii of M. Volteius (385/3) 32. Doldbrum 33. Lecythus 34. Boot 35. Lighted altar 36. Foot
80. 81.
37-
85.
38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44.
Shovel Comb Bipennis Long boot Helmet without crest Hook Plectrum
4546. 47Denarii of M. Volteius (385/4) 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57.
Dolabrum Lecythus Piercer Boot Perfume-jar Lighted altar Axe Stove Short boot Foot
58. 59. Shovel 60. Comb Denarius of L. Plaetorius Cestianus 61.
Denarii of C. Piso Frugi 82.
83. 84. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 9192.
939495-
96. 97-
98. 99100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. Denarii of M. Plaetorius Cestianus (409/2) 108. Hammer 109. Hammer 110. Spearhead
795
Key to the plates 111. Straight wing 112. Straight wing 113. 114. 115.
116. 117. 118. 119120.
796
BIBLIOGRAPHY1 D. Adamcsteanu and M. Torelli, 'II nuovo frammento della Tabula Bantina', ArchClass 1969, 1-17. Baron d'Ailly, see P.-P. Bourlier. J. Y. Akerman, A descriptive catalogue of rare and unedited Roman coins from the earliest period of Roman coinage, to the extinction of the Empire under Constantinus Paleologus i, London, 1820. M. Albert, Le culte de Castor et Pollux en Italic, Paris, 1883. P. V. Aldini, 'Sul tipo primario delle antichc monete della romana repubblica', Memorie della reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino 1841, 199-208. A. Alfoldi, 'Caesars Tragodie im Spiegel der Miinzpragung des Jahres 44 v. Chr.', SMzB 1953-4. i - « 'Commandants de la flotte romaine stationnce a Cyrene sous Pompee, Cesar et Octavien', Melanges d'archeologie, d'dpigraphie et d'histoire offerts aj. Carcopino, Paris, 1966, 25-43. ' Les deniers de C. Valerius Flaccus frappes a Marseille et les dernieres emissions de drachmes massaliotes', RN 1969, 55-61. Early Rome and the Latins, Ann Arbor, 1963. 'Der Einmarsch Octavians im Rom, August 43 v. Chr.', Hermes 1958, 480-96. ' Die Erklarung des Namcns " Caesar " in den spatromischen Kompendien (zu v. Ael. 2,3-5)', Antiquilas, Reihe 4 Beitrcige zur Historia-Augusta-Forschung, Band 4, Bonn, 1968, 9-18. Der fruhromische Reiteradel und seine Ehrenabzeichen, Offenburg, 1952. 'Die Geburt der kaiserlichen Bildsymbolik', MH 1950, 1-13 and 1951, 190-215. 'Hasta summa imperil. The spear as embodiment of sovereignty in Rome', AJA 1959,1-27. 'Die Herrschaft der Reiterei in Griechenland und Rom nach dem Sturz der Konige', Gestalt und Geschichte: FestschriftK. Schefold, Bonn, 1967, 13-47. 'Insignien und Tracht der romischen Kaiser', MDAI(R) 1935, 1-171. 'Isiskult und Umsturzbewegung im letzten Jahrhundert der romischen Republik', SMzB 1954-5. 25-31'Juba I und die Pompeianer in Afrika', SMzB 1958, 103-8 and 1959, 1-5. 'Komplementare Doppeltypen in der Denarpragung der romischen Republik', SMzB 1951-2, 1-7. 'The main aspects of political propaganda in the coinage of the Roman Republic', Essays in Roman coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Oxford, 1956, 63-95. 'Der neue Weltherrscher der vierten Ekloge Vergils', Hermes 1930, 369-84. 'La piu antica rappresentazione del porto di Ostia', Numismatica 1964, 99-104. ' The portrait of Caesar on the denarii of 44 B.C. and the sequence of the issues', Centennial volume of the American Numismatic Society, New York, 1958, 27-42. ' Portratkunst und Politik in 43 v. Chr.', Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek in honorem A. W. Bijvanck 1954, 151-71. 1
The purpose of this Bibliography is to give full details of works cited by author's name and abbreviated title or periodical reference; it also includes a number of works which I have read, but not cited. It should in no way be regarded as a recommended reading-list on the Republican coinage; important work on this is cited at appropriate points throughout the book, both to support my argument and to draw attention to areas of disagreement. I have not listed again here the works listed on pp. 123-5 o r mentioned on pp. 126-30 in connection with the collections cited in the Catalogue, unless their interest goes beyond the study of the content of an issue or group of issues or the publication of material; nor have I included works cited in the Appendix to the Catalogue which do not go beyond the publication of a particular group of material. Abbreviations are basically those of VAnnie philologique and of the list in Coin hoards, 148-55.
797
Bibliography ' Studien iiber Caesar's Monarchic I', Bulletin de la Soctiti royale des lettres de Lund 1932-3, 1-86. 'Studien zur Zeitfolge der Munzpragung der romischen Republik', SNR 1954, 5-30. 'Symboles syllaniens et propagande pompeienne', REL 1950, 54-5. 'Timaios' Bericht iiber die Anfange der Geldpragung in Rom', MDAI(R) 1961, 64-79. Die trojanischen Urahnen der RSmer, Basle, 1957. 'Das wahre Gesicht Casars', AK 1959, 27-31. 'Zum Speersymbol der Souveranitat im Altertum', Festschrift Percy Ernst Schramm i, Wiesbaden, 1964, 3-6. 'Zur Auswertung der Miinzquellen der Geschichte des Jahres 44 v. Chr.', JBM 1961-2, 275-88 and SMzB 1964, 29-33, 65-76; 1965, 29-41; 1966, 4-17, 145-9; 1968, 57-74J 1969, 1-7, and SNR 1968, 51-103. 'Zur romischen Munzpragung im zweiten punischen Kriege', JNG 1965, 33-47. [Review of] K. Pink, The Triumviri monetales and the structure of the coinage of the Roman Republic, New York, 1952, Gnomon 1954, 381-91. D . F. Allen, 'Monnaies-a-la-croix', NC 1969, 33-78. M. Almagro Basch and M. Almagro Gorbea, 'El tesorillo de Valeria. Nuevas aportaciones', Numisma 1964, 25-47. F. Altheim, 'The first Roman silver coinage', Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, organised and held in London by the Royal Numismatic Society, June 30-July 3, 1936, on the occasion of its centenary, London, 1938, 137-50. H. A. Andersen, Cassius Dio und die Begrundung des Principates, Berlin, 1938. A. R. Anderson, 'Heracles and his successors', HSCPh 1928, 7-58. P. E. Arias, 'Nuovi contributi all'iconografia di Ottavia minore', MDAI{R) 1939, 76-81. T. Ashby, The aqueducts of ancient Rome, edited by I. A. Richmond, Oxford, 1935. E. Assmann, 'Zur Kenntnis der antiken SchiftV, JDAI1889, 91-104. A. E. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, Oxford, 1967. R. G. Austin, Cicero: Pro M. Caelio, 3rd ed. Oxford, i960. E. Babelon, 'Bacchius, Judaeus', RBN 1891, 5-24. 'La loi Plautia-Papiria et la reforme monetaire', RN 1884, 36-66. 'Moneta', Mimoires de VAcademie des inscriptions, 1914, 241-92. Monnaies de la ripublique romaine, 2 vols. Paris and London, 1885-6. 'Vercing6torix; etude d'iconographie numismatique', RN 1902, 1-35. J. Babelon, 'L'effigie de Flamininus', RBN 1970, 59-63. Le portrait dans I'antiquite d'apres les monnaies, Paris, 1942. E. Badian, 'Additional notes on Roman magistrates', Athenaeum 1970, 3-14. 'The date of Pompey's first triumph', Hermes 1955, 107-18. 'M. Calpurnius M.f. Piso Frugi', Ada of the fifth International Congress of Greek and Latin epigraphy, Cambridge, 1967, Oxford, 1971, 209-14. 'M. Porcius Cato and the annexation and early administration of Cyprus \JRS 1965,110-21. 'Notes on Provincia Gallia in the late Republic', Milanges d'archiologie et d'histoire off ens a Andre Piganiol ii, Paris, 1966, 901-18. 'Notes on Roman senators of the Republic', Historia 1963, 129-43. 'P. Decius P. f. Subulo; an orator of the time of the Gracchi', JRS 1956, 91-6. 'A reply', Arethusa 1969, 199-201. Roman Imperialism in the late Republic, 2nd ed. Oxford, 1968. 'Servilius and Pompey's first triumph', Hermes 1961, 254-6. Studies in Greek and Roman history, Oxford, 1964. 'Sulla's augurate', Arethusa 1968, 26-46. 'The testament of Ptolemy Alexander', RM 1967, 178-92. [Review of] T. R. S. Broughton, Supplement to the magistrates of the Roman Republic, New York, i960, Gnomon 1961, 492-8. [Review of] A. E. Douglas, Cicero: Brutus, Oxford, 1 9 6 6 , ^ 5 1967, 223-30. [Review of] H. Malcovati, Cicero: Brutus, Leipzig, 1965, .7.RS 1967, 223-30. M. Bahrfeldt, 'Antike Miinztechnik', BMzB 1904, 433-48 = Feier der numismatischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 1903,7-}-%%.
798
Bibliography 'Les deniers de la republique romaine a bords denteles dits: "nummi serrati'", Bulletin mensuel de Numismatique et d'Archiologie 1883-84,130-3. 'Die Kupfermiinzen der romischen Metelli', NZ 1881,149-77. 'Meine numismatische Reise nach Spanien und Portugal 1928', Blatter fur Milnzfreunde 1930-33. 754-5'Le monete romano-campane', RIN 1899, 387-446 and 1900,11-84. 'Die Miinzen der Flottenprafekten des Marcus Antonius', NZ 1905, 9-56. 'Nachtrage und Berichtigungen zur Miinzkunde der romischen Republik', NZ 1896, 1-170; 1897,1-150; 1900, 5-116 and 1918, 73-180. Romische Consularmiinzen in italienischen Sammlungen; ein Beitrag zur romischen Numismatik, Stade in Hannover, 1877. Die romische Goldmtinzenprdgung, Halle, 1923. 'Romische inedita', Festschrift zur Feier des fiinfzigjahrigen Bestehens der numismatischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin, Berlin, 1893, 151-62. ' Stempelvertauschungen bei romischen Familien-Miinzen', ZfN 1877, 27-49. ' Sur quelques medailles consulates inedites des musees Roumianzew et de l'Universite de Moscou', ASFN 1886, 258-64. 'Ober die altesten Denare Roms', ZfN 1878, 30-61. 'Ober die Chronologie der Miinzen des Marcus Antonius 710-724 u.c. (44-30 v. Chr.)', Atli del Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche vi, Sezione Numismatica, Rome, 1904, 187-200. 'Ueber die Miinzen der romischen Republik in der grossherzoglich Badischen Miinzsammlung zu Karlsruhe', NZ 1891, 95-116. 'Oberpragte Miinzen aus der Zeit der romischen Republik', ZfN 1895, 72-90. ' Untersuchungen iiber die Chronologie der Miinzen der Domitii Ahenobarbi aus der Zeit der romischen Republik', ZfN 1895, 53-71. ' Victoriate mit vertieften Roma', ZfN 1876, 235-6. 'Die Wertzeichen S und £ auf Miinzen der romischen Republik', Blatter fur Munzfreunde 1930-33. 679-82. 'Zur Numismatik der romischen Republik. 1, Das Munzmeisterbeizeict*~n "Flagge" auf Kupfermiinzen der romischen Republik. 11, Ober der Sextans mit AA'. 'fN 1885,132-6. [Review of] R. Garrucci, Le monete dell'Italia antica, Rome, 1885, Num. L raturblatt 1887,
385-91. [Review of] R. Herzog, Aus der Geschichte des Bankwesens in Altertum. Tesserae Nummulariae, Giessen, 1919, Num. Literaturblatt 1920, 1769-70. M. Bahrfeldt and E. Forchheimer, 'Zwei romische Denarschatze', NZ 1877, 284-302. H. R. Baldus, 'Der Helm des Tryphon und die seleukidische Chronologie der Jahre 146-138 v. Chr.', JNG 1970, 217-39. A. Balil, 'Tipos de origen pictorico en la moneda romana repubblicana', Numisma 1958, 9-23. J. P. V. D. Balsdon, 'Sulla F e l i x ' , ^ 5 1951, 1-10. [Review of] M. Gelzer, Pompeius, Munich, 1949, Historia 1950, 296-300. A. Barb, 'Zur antiken Munztechnik', NZ 1930,1-7. A. Barilli, ' Sulle monete consolari: alcune considerazioni sulla tecnica di fabbricazione dei denari consolari cosi detti dentellati o serrati', RIN 1942, 44-6. H. Bartels, Studien zum Frauenportrat der augusteischen Zeit, Munich, 1963. R. Bartoccini, ' Le figurazioni degli assi di C. Marcius Censorinus', Rassegna Numismatica 1913. 97-105. 'Villa Publica', Atti e Memorie dell'Istituto Italiano di Numismatica 1915, 215-28. J. Bayet, 'Les Cerialia, alteration d'un culte latin par le mythe grec', RBPh 1951, 5-36 and 341-66. 'Uomen du cheval a Carthage: Timee, Virgile et le monnayage punique', REL 1941,166-90. Les origines de VHercule romain, Paris, 1926. 'Les sacerdoces romaines et la pre-divinisation imperiale', BAB 1955, 453-527. J. D. Beazley, Attic red-figure vase-painters, 2nd ed. 3 vols. Oxford, 1963. G. Becatti, La colonna cochlide istoriata. Problemi storici, iconografici, stilistici, Rome, i960. R. Beigel, Rechnungswesen und Buchfiihrung der Rimer, Karlsruhe, 1904,
799
Bibliography A. R. Bellinger, The excavations at Dura-Europos conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, Final Report vi: The coins, New Haven, 1949. K. J. Beloch, Griechische Geschichte, 2nd ed. 4 vols. Berlin, 1924-27. E. Benveniste, Le vocabulaire des institutions indo-europeennes, 2 vols. Paris, 1969. J. Beranger, 'Der "Genius populi Romani" in der Kaiserpolitik', BJ 1965, 72-87. E. Bernareggi, 'Note su alcuni assi sestantari ed onciali', RIN 1964, 7-32. 'Nummi pelliculati (considerazioni sull'argento suberato della repubblica romana)', RIN 1965, 5-31M. E. Bertoldi, 'Un monumento commemorativo sul Campidoglio', Quaderni dell'Inst. Top. Ant. v, 1968, 39-53. E. Bibra, Vber alte Eisen- und Silberfunde, Nuremberg-Leipzig, 1873. E. J. Bickerman, 'Some reflections on early Roman history', RFIC 1969, 393-408. M. Bieber, Alexander the Great in Greek and Roman art, Chicago, 1954. G. Binder, Die Aussetzung des Konigskindes Kyros und Romulus, Meissenheim-am-Glan, 1964. A. Blanchet, 'Le congiarium de Cesar et les monnaies signees Palikanus', RIN 1904, 177-82 = Atti del Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche vi, Sezione Numismatica, Rome, 1904, 101-5. 'Etude sur les figurines en terre cuite de la Gaule romaine', BSAF 1890, 65-224. 'Les fonctions des triumvirs monetaires', RN 1896, 14-19. 'Un projet de monnaie de la republique romaine', RN 1898, 122-3. H. Blanck, Wiedererwendung alter Statuen als Ehrendenkmdler bei Griechen und Rb'mern, Rome, 1969. J. Bleicken, ' Coniuratio, die Schwurszene auf den Miinzen und Gemmen der romischen Republik \JNG 1963, 51-70. 'Provocatio', RE xxiii, 2444-63. J. Boardman, Engraved gems: the Ionides collection, London, 1968. A. Boeckh, Metrologische Untersuchungen u'ber Gewichte, Munzfiisse und Masse des Alterthums in ihrem Zusammenhange, Berlin, 1838. S. Bolin, 'Zur Frage der altesten romischen Goldmiinzen und des Verhaltnis zwischen As und Sesterz. Plinius Nat. Hist, xxxiii, 3, 47', Blatter fur Munzfreunde 1927-9, 273, 291, 353. F. Bomer, 'Kybele in Rom, die Geschichte ihres Kults als politisches Phanomen', MDAI(R) 1964, 130-51P. Ovidius Naso, Die Fasten, 2 vols. Heidelberg, 1957-8. N. Bonacasa, Ritratti greci e romani della Sicilia, Catalogo, Palermo, 1964. P. Bonazzi, 'Le prime monete romane di bronzo coniate in Sicilia', RIN 1922, 5-26. H. C. Boren, 'Numismatic light on the Gracchan crisis', AJPh 1958, 140-55. 'The urban side of the Gracchan economic crisis', AHR 1957-8, 890-902 = The crisis of the Roman Republic, edited by R. Seager, 54-66. B. Borghesi, Oeuvres completes, 10 vols. Paris, 1862-97. P.-P. Bourlier, Baron d'Ailly, Recherches sur la monnaie romaine, 4 vols. Lyon, 1864-9. J. Bousquet, 'Inscriptions grecques concernant des Romains', BCH 1964, 607-15. P. Boyance, 'La main de Fides', Hommages a Jean Bayet, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1964, 101-13 (Collection Latomus 70). A. A. Boyce, 'The gold staters of T. Quinctius Flamininus in history', Hommages a Albert Grenier i, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1962, 342-50 (Collection Latomus 58). R. Bra'uer, 'Die Heraklestaten auf antiken Miinzen', ZfN 1910, 35-112. L. Breglia, 'Note stilistiche sul quadrigato', RAL 1951, 265-74. La primafase della coniazione romana dell'argento, Rome, 1952. 'Riepiloghi e considerazioni', AIIN 1958-9, 331-5. 'Spunti di politica monetale romana in Sicilia ed in Sardegna', RAAN 1949-50, 13-29. O. J. Brendel, 'The iconography of Marc Antony', Hommages a A. Grenier i, BruxellesBerchem, 1962, 359-67 (Collection Latomus 58). 'Two Fortunae, Antium and Praeneste', AJA i960, 41-7. J.-P. Brisson, 'Carthage et le fatum. Reflexions sur un theme de l'Eneide', Hommages a Marcel Renard i, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1969, 162-73 (Collection Latomus 101). 800
Bibliography British Museum, Catalogue of the Greek coins ofCyrenaica in the British Museum, by E. S. G. Robinson, London, 1927. Catalogue of the Greek coins of Phrygia, by B. V. Head, London, 1906. Catalogue of Greek coins, Thessaly to Aetolia, edited by R. S. Poole, London, 1883. Catalogue of the Greek coins of Troas, Aeolis, and Lesbos, by W. Wroth, London, 1894. Fr. Brommer, 'Zu den romischen Ahnenbildern', MDAI(R) 1953-4, 163-71. T. R. S. Broughton, The magistrates of the Roman Republic, 2 vols. New York, 1951-2. The magistrates of the Roman Republic, Supplement, New York, i960. F. E. Brown, 'Magni nominis umbrae', Studies presented to David Moore Robinson on his seventieth birthday i, Saint Louis, 1951, 761-4. A. Bruhl, Liber pater. Origine el expansion du culte dionysiaque a Rome et dans le monde romaine, Paris, 1953. P. A, Brunt, 'The equites in the late Republic', Second International Conference of Economic History, Aix-en Provence, 1962, i Trade and politics in the ancient world, 117-49 = The crisis of the Roman Republic, edited by R. Seager, 83-115. Italian manpower 22s B.C.-A.D. 14, Oxford, 1971. H. Buchheim, Die Orientpolitik des Triumvirn M. Antonius, Heidelberg, i960. W. Burkert, 'Caesar und Romulus-Quirinus', Historia 1962, 356-76. T. V. Buttrey, 'The Morgantina excavations and the date of the Roman denarius', Congresso Internazionale di Numismaiica 1961, Atti, Rome 1965, 261-7. 'On the retariffing of the Roman denarius', ANSMusN 1957, 57-65. The triumviral portrait gold of the Quattuorviri monetales of 42 B.C., New York, 1956. L. Cagnazzi, Su i valori delle misure e dei pesi degli antichi Romani, Naples, 1825. W. Caland, 'Die Imperator-Acclamationen des M. Antonius', ZfN 1885, 137-43. De nummis M. Antonii III viri vitam et res gestas illustrantibus, Diss. Leyden, 1883. E. R. Caley, The composition of ancient Greek bronze coins, Philadelphia, 1939. Orichalcum and related ancient alloys. Origin, composition and manufacture with special reference to the coinage of the Roman Empire, New York, 1964. ' Validity of the specific gravity method for the determination of the fineness of gold objects', Ohio Journal of Science, 1949, 73-82. G. Calza, 'La figurazione di Roma nell'arte antica', Dedalo 1926-7, 663-88. W. Campbell, Greek and Roman plated coins, New York, 1933. Cambridge Ancient History edited by J. B. Bury, S. A. Cook, F. E. Adcock, M. P. Charlesworth and N. H. Baynes, 12 vols. Cambridge, 1923-39. Cambridge Ancient History, plates prepared by C. T. Seltman, iv, Cambridge, 1934. L. Canina, Descrizione dell'antico Tuscolo, Rome, 1841. F. Capranesi, 'Medaglie romane inedite', Annali 1842, 129-36. 'Monete romane inedite', Annali 1839, 280-7. T. F. Carney, A biography of C. Marius. Inaugural lecture given in the University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Proceedings of the African Classical Associations, suppl. no. 1. 'Coins bearing on the age and career of Marius', NC 1959, 79-88. R. Carpenter, 'The identity of the ruler', AJA 1945, 353-7. R. A. G. Carson, 'Caesar and the monarchy', G & R 1957, 46-53. [Review of] K. Kraft, Der goldene Kranz Caesars und der Kampf um die Entlarvung des Tyrannen, Darmstadt, 1969 = JNG 1952-3, 7-97, Gnomon 1956, 184-6. G. F. Carter, 'X-ray fluorescence analysis of Roman coins', Analytical Chemistry 1964, 1264-8. L. Carton, 'Note sur des edicules renfermant des statues en terre cuite, decouverts dans la region de Ghardimaou (Tunisie)', CRAI1918, 338-47. M. Caspari, 'On the dated coins of Julius Caesar and Mark Antony', JVC 1911, 101-8. S. Casson, 'The technique of Greek coin dies', Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, organised and held in London by the Royal Numismatic Society, June 30-July 3, 1936, on the occasion of its centenary, London, 1938, 40-52. F. Castagnoli, 'II Campo Marzio nell'antichita', MAL 1948, 93-193. 'Note numismatiche', ArchClass 1953, 104-11. 'II problema dell'Ara di Domizio Enobarbo', AFig 1945, 181-96. 801
Bibliography E. Cavaignac, 'Les debuts du monnayage romain', REL 1953,106-9. ' L'erreur de Plinc xxxiii, 13', Congris International de Numismatique 1953, Actes, Paris, 1953, 573-<5. C. Cavedoni, 'Animadversiones in nummos romanos saeculi augustei', Annali 1850, 150206. 'Appendice al saggio di osservazioni sulle medaglie di famiglie romane', Memorie direligione, di morale e di letteratura xviii, 163-266 and Continuazione delle Memorie di religione, di morale e di letteratura i, 101-32 and iv, 241-302, 477-80. 'Conghietture sopra le monete di Ti. Veturio Barro', Bullettino 1840,167-9. 'Dei dcnari di L. Furio Brocco triumviro monetale', Bullettino 1852, 59-61. 'Del significato di un tipo singolare comune alle monete della famiglia Eppia e della Rubria', Bullettino 1858, 174-6. 'Di alcune medaglie di famiglie romane', Bullettino 1845, 177-92. 'Dichiarazione di alcuni tipi di medaglie di famiglie romane', Annali 1839, 292-321. 'Di due vittoriati quinarii di famiglie romane, l'uno deH'Egnaruleia e l'altro della Fundania', Bullettino 1849, 184-5. 'Monete impresse dai Pompejani per la guerra d'Africa', Bullettino 1843, 6-!3'Nuovi studi intorno all'origine, durata e diminuzione dzWaes grave romano', Opuscoli religiosi, letterari e morali (2nd series) vi, 1865, 161-75 = Numismatisch-sphragistischer Anzeiger 1898,12-16, 21-5 and 31-3. 'Nuovi studi sopra le antiche monete consolari e di famiglie romane. Osservazioni critiche intorno alia storia della moneta presso i Romani scritta dal Professore Teodoro Mommsen, Bullettino Archeologico Italiano 1861, 57-68 = Opuscoli religiosi, letterari e morali x, 1861, 321-48. 'Osservazioni numismatiche spettanti al Manuale d'Archeologia deU'Arti di C. O. Miiller, Annali i860, 281-92. 'Osservazioni sopra alcune monete di famiglie romane', Annali 1849, 186-208. ' Osservazioni sul tipo rappresentante gli orti di Alcinoo nelle monete di Corcira e sue colonie, e sopra alquante altre antiche monete greche', Memorie della reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino 1836, 139-56. Ragguaglio storico archeologico dei precipui ripostigli antichi di medaglie consolari e di famiglie romane d'argento, Modena, 1854. Saggio di osservazioni sulle medaglie di famiglie romane ritrovate in tre antichi ripostigli dell'agro modenese, Modena, 1829. [Review of] H. Cohen, Description ginirale des monnaies de la ripublique romaine, communiment appelies midailles consulates, Paris, 1857, RN 1857, 184-92 and 346-62. [Review of] G. Riccio, Le monete delle antiche famiglie di Roma fino allo imperatore Augusto, 2nd ed. Naples, 1843, Bullettino 1844, 21-9. I. Cazzaniga, 'Nota al testo di Plinio, N.H. xxiii 46', PP 1967, 366-7. S. L. Cesano, 'La data di istituzione del "denarius" di Roma', Bullettino del Museo del Impero Romano 1938, 3-26. 'I Dioscuri sulle monete antiche', BCAR 55 1928, 101-37. 'I Fasti della repubblica romana sulla moneta di Roma', Studi di numismatica i, 2, 105262. 'La figura di Roma sulle monete romane', Roma 1929, 385-400 and Atti del i" Congresso Nazionale di Studi Romani i, Rome, 1929, 52-8. 'M. Antonius-Sol (monete di M.A.]', Bollettino delVAssociazione Archeologica Romana 1910-12, 231-47. 'Le monete di Cesare', RPAA 1947-9,103-51. 'Prove di conio', Rassegna Numismatica 1907, 57-72. F. Chamoux, 'Un portrait de Flamininus a Delphes', BCH 1965, 214-24. J. Charbonneaux, 'Aidn et Philippe l'Arabe', MEFR i960, 253-72. 'Un portrait de Cleopatre VII au Musee de ChercheP, Libyca 1954, 49-63. K. Christ, 'Antike Siegespragungen', Gymnasium 1957, 504-33. C. Cichorius, Romische Studien, Leipzig, 1922. Untersuchungen zu Lucilius, Zurich and Berlin, 1964. 802
Bibliography C. J. Classen, 'Gottmenschentum in der rb'mischen Republik', Gymnasium 1963, 312-38. 'Die Konigszeit im Spiegel der Literatur der romischen Republik. (Ein Beitrag zum Selbstverstandnis der Romer)', Historia 1965, 385-403. 'Romulus in der romischen Republik', Philologus 1962, 174-204. 'Zur Herkunft der Sage von Romulus und Remus', Historia 1963, 447-57. L. Clerici, Economia efinanza dei Romani i, Bologna, 1943. F. Coarelli, 'L'"ara di Domizio Enobarbo" e la cultura artistica in Roma nel II secolo a . C , Dialoghi di Archeologia 1968, 302-68. 'Le Tyrannoctone du Capitole et la mort de Tiberius Gracchus', MEFR 1969, 137-60. H. Cohen, Description ginirale des monnaies de la Republique romaine, communement appele'es midailles consulates, Paris, 1857. Description historique des monnaies frappies sous VEmpire remain i,.Paris, 1880. J. B. Colbert de Beaulieu, 'Les monnaies de Vercinge'torix: nouvelles acquisitions', Gallia 1966, 21-8. 'Umlauf und Chronologie der gallo-keltischen Miinzen', JNG 1966, 45-62. J.B.Colbert de Beaulieu and G. Lefevre, 'Les monnaies de Vercingetorix', Gallia 1963, 11-75. R. Combes, Imperator. Recherches sur Vemploi et la signification du titre d'Imperator dans la Rome ripublicaine, Paris, 1966. T. L. Comparette, 'Aes signatum', American Journal of Numismatics 1918, 1-61. J. Condamin and M. Picon, 'The influence of corrosion and diffusion on the percentage of silver in the Roman denarii', Archaeometry 1964, 98-105. 'Notes on diffusion in ancient alloys', Archaeometry 1965, 110-14. J. Condamin, J. Guey and M. Picon, 'Techniques romaines', RN 1965,123-33. R. S. Conway, The Italic dialects i, Cambridge, 1897. A. B. Cook, "The gong at Dodona', JHS 1902, 5-28. Zeus: a study in ancient religion, 3 vols. Cambridge, 1914. R. M. Cook, 'Dogs in battle', Festschrift A. Rumpf, Krefeld, 1952, 38-42. L. H. Cope, 'The nadir of the imperial antoninianus in the reign of Claudius II Gothicus, A.D. 268-270', NC 1969, 145-61. 'Roman imperial silver coinage alloy standards: the evidence', NC 1967,107-31. M. della Corte, Case ed abitanti di Pompei, 2nd ed. Rome, 1954. M. H. Crawford, 'The coinage of the age of Sulla', with Prosopographical notes by T. P. Wiseman, NC 1964,141-58. 'Coin hoards and the pattern of violence in the late Republic', PBSR 1969, 76-81. 'The edict of M. Marius Gratidianus', PCPhS 1968, 1-4. 'The financial organization of Republican Spain', NC 1969, 79-93. 'Money and exchange in the Roman world', JRS 1970, 40-8. 'Plated coins, false coins', NC 1968, 55-9. 'A Roman representation of the idpanos Tpw'iKOs', JRS 1971,153-4. Roman Republican coin hoards, London, 1969. 'Roman Republican numismatics', A survey of numismatic research 1960-65 i, Ancient numismatics, edited by Otto Merkholm, Copenhagen, 1967, 153-61. 'Saturninus and the Italians', CP 1969, 37-8. 'War and finance', JRS 1964, 29-32. [Review of] P. Bastien, Le monnayage de bronze de Postume, Wetteren, 1967, JRS 1969, 291-2. [Review of] L. R. Taylor, Roman voting assemblies from the Hannibalic War to the dictatorship of Caesar, Ann Arbor, 1966, NC 1967, 302-3. [Review of] M. Thirion, Les trisors monitaires gaulois et romains trouvis en Belgique, Brussels, 1967, JRS 1969, 290-1. J. W. Crous, 'Roma auf Waffen', Corolla Ludwig Curtius zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht, Stuttgart, 1937, 217-24. L. Curtius, ' Ikonographische Beitrage zum Portrat der romischen Republik und der julischclaudischen Familie', MDAI(R) 1932, 202-68; 1933, 182-243 and 1934, 119-56. 'Redeat narratio', MDAI1951,10-34. 803
Bibliography G. Daux, 'A propos des monnaies luculliennes', RN 1935, 1-9. 'Concours des Titeia dans un decret d'Argos', BCH 1964, 569-76. 'Notes de lecture', BCH 1965, 301-6. A. Degrassi, 'Nuovi miliari arcaici', Hommages a A. Grenier i, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1962, 499513 (Collection Latomus 58). A. C. Deliperi, 'LaTunzione del " quadrilatero"', Numismatica 1943-5, 38-47. W. Deonna, ' Un portrait d'Aulus Postumius Albinus', Actas y Memorias de la Sociedad Espanola de Antropologia, Etnografia y Preistoria, 1947, 5-13. G. Devoto, 'La leggenda di Tarpea e gli Etruschi', SE 1958,17-25. Scritti minori ii, Florence, 1967. J. DobiaJ, 'Roman imperial coins as a source for Germanic antiquities', Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, organised and held in London by the Royal Numismatic Society, June 30-July 3, 1936 on the occasion of its centenary, London, 1938, 160-78. A. E. Douglas, M. Tulli Ciceronis Brutus, Oxford, 1966. H. Dressel, Beschreibung der antiken Miinzen, 3 vols. Berlin, 1888-94. 'SORS', ZfN 1922, 24-32. H. Dresse'. and A. Milchhofer, 'Die antiken Kunstwerke aus Sparta und Umgebung', MDAI(A) 1877, 293-474. W. D. Drumann, Geschichte Roms in seinem Vbergange von der republikanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung, 6 vols. (herausgegeben von P. Groebe), Berlin, 1899. G. Dume'zil, 'Iuno S.M.R.', Eranos 1954, 105-19. La religion romaine archaique, suivi d'un appendice sur la religion des £trusques, Paris, 1966. Tarpeia. Essais de philologie comparative indo-europienne, Paris, 1947. N. Diirr, 'Une importante acquisition du Cabinet de Numismatique', Musees de Geneve 37, 1963, 11. P. M. Duval, 'Le milliaire de Domitius et l'organisation de la Narbonnaise', RAN 1968, 3-6. D. C. Earl, 'M. Octavius, trib. pleb. 133 B.C., and his successor', Latomus i960, 657-69. J. Eckhel, Doctrina nummorum veterum, 8 vols. Vienna, 1792-8. L. Edelstein, 'Recent trends in the interpretation of ancient science', JHI1952, 572-604. W. Ehlers, 'Die Grundungsprodigien von Lavinium und Alba Longa', MH 1949, 166-75. 'Triumphus', RE viiA, 493-511. S. Eitrem, 'Der Skorpion in Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte', 5 0 1928, 53-82. M. Elberling, 'Melanges de numismatique romaine', RBN i860, 117-32. A. Eran, 'Zu den PNR-Quadranten des Claudius und deren Waage', SMzB 1969, 8-9. E. C. Ercolani, 'Iconografia di Veiove sulla moneta romana repubblicana', RIN 1968, 115-30. H. Ericsson see H. Erkell. H. Erkell, Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna: lateinische Wortstudien, Goteborg, 1952, 71-107 = H. Ericsson, 'Sulla Felix', Eranos 1943, 77-89. J. Escher, 'Erichthonius', RE vi, 439-46. C. C. van Essen, 'Venus Cloacina', Mnemosyne 1956, 137-44. U. Ewins, 'The enfranchisement of Cisalpine Gaul', PBSR 1955, 73-98. D. Felber, 'Caesar's Streben nach der Konigswurde', in F. Altheim, D . Felber, Einzeluntersuchungen zur altitalischen Geschichte, Anfdnge rb'mischer Geschichtsschreibung, Frankfurtam-Main, 1961. B. M. Felletti Maj, Museo Nazionale Romano, I ritratti, Rome, 1953. M. I Finley, ' Technical innovation and economic progress in the ancient world', Economic History Review 1965, 29-45. 'Trade and politics in the ancient world, Classical Greece', Second International Conference of Economic History, Aix-en-Provence, 1962 i, 11-35. D. Fishwick, 'Hastiferi', JRS 1967, 142-60. L. Forteleoni, Le emissioni monetali delta Sardegna punica, Sassari, 1961. J. de Foville, 'Etudes de numismatique et de glyptique', RN 1905, 277-308. W. Warde Fowler, The Roman festivals of the period of the Republic; an introduction to the study of the religion of the Romans, London, 1908. T. Frank, An economic survey of ancient Rome, 5 vols. and General index, Baltimore, 1933-40. 'On the dates of Plautus' Casina and its revival', AJPh 1933, 368-72.
804
Bibliography P. R. Franke, "Ap-reuis WTTAICTH&TI ', AA 1963, 450-4. P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 3 vols. Oxford, 1972. J. Friedlander, 'Alphabete und SyUabarien auf romischen Miinzen', Hermes 1875, 251-3. 'Die Erwerbungen des Miinzkabinets im Jahre 1880', ZfN 1882,1-17. 'Ueberpragte antike Miinzen', ZfN 1877, 328-49. B. Frier, 'Augural symbolism in Sulla's invasion of 83', ANSMusN 1967, 111-18. 'Sulla's priesthood', Arethusa 1969, 187-99. W. Froehner, 'Kritische Analekten', Philologus, Suppl. v, Heft i, 1-96. G. Fuchs, Architekturdarstellungen auf romischen Miinzen der Republik und derfruhen Kaiserzeit, Berlin, 1969. 'Fragmenta saeptorum. Untersuchungen am sogenannten Comitium in Pompei', MDAI(R) 1957. 145-97'Zur Baugeschichte der Basilica Aemilia in republikanischer Zeit', MDAl{R) 1956, 14-25. A. Furtwangler, Die antiken Gemmen. Geschichte der Steinschneidekunst im klassischen Altertum, 3 vols. Leipzig, 1900. Beschreibung der geschnittenen Steine im Antiquariuniy Konigliche Museen zu Berlin, Berlin, 1896. Kleine Schriften, hg. von J. Sieveking und L. Curtius, 2 vols. Munich, 1912-13. E. Gabba, Appiani Bellorum Civilium liber primus, Firenze, 1958. Appiani Bellorum Civilium liber quint us, Firenze, 1970. 'Le origini della guerra sociale e la vita politica romana dopo 1*89 a . C , Athenaeum 1954, 41-114. ' Le origini dell'esercito professionale in Roma.: i proletari e la riforma di Mario', Athenaeum 1949. 173-209. E. Gabrici, 'Poche osservazioni sul denaro di L. Memmi', RIN 1892, 175-97. 'La riconiazione del bronzo studiata in rapporto con la riduzione dell'asse nell'Italia e nella Sicilia', Bollettino del Circolo Numismatico Napoletano 1947-8, 29-52. H. Gaebler, 'Zur Miinzkunde Makedoniens', ZfN 1902, 141-89. J. Gag6, Apollon romain, Paris, 1955. 'Les Cornelii Lentuli et le "genius populi Romani": a propos d'un aspect du culte du "Divus Julius"', Congres International de Numismatique 1953, Actes, Paris, 1953, 21927'Le dieu "inventor" et les Minucii', MEFR 1966, 79-122. 'Romulus-Augustus', MEFR 1930, 138-81. G. K. Galinsky, Aeneas, Sicily, and Rome, Princeton, 1969. F. L. Gamer, 'Die Diktaturen Caesar's und die Miinzen der fiinf ersten IIII viri a.a.a.f.f.', ZfN 1895, 183-203. R. Garrucci, Le monete deWItalia antica, Rome, 1885. L. Gasperini, 'Epigrafi di Taranto Romana', Seconda miscellanea Greca e Romana, Studi Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica, 1968, 379-97. K. Gast, Die zensorischen Bauberichte bei Livius und die romischen Bauinschriften, Diss. Gottingen, 1965. B. Gatz, Weltalter, goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen, Hildesheim, 1967. M. Gelzer, Caesar: politician and statesman, Oxford, 1968. Pompeius, Munich, 1949. The Roman nobility, Oxford, 1969. L. Gerschel, ' Structures augurales et tripartition fonctionnelle dans la pensee de l'ancienne Rome', Journal de psychologie normale el pathologique, 1952, 47-77. H. Gesche, 'Die Reiterstatuen der Aemilier und Marcier', JNG 1968, 25-42. Die Vergottung Caesars, Kallmiinz, 1968. J.-B. Giard, 'La monnaie de Capoue et le probleme de la datation du denier remain', Congresso Internazionale di Numismatica 1961, Atti, Rome, 1965, 235-60. 'Une monnaie surfrapp6e de Capoue', BSFN 1961, 3. 'Le rapport de l'or a l'argent vers 211 av. J . C , BSFN 1961, 91-2. 'Le tr6sor de Port-Haliguen. Contribution a l'6tude du monnayage d'Auguste', RN 1967, 119-39-
805
Bibliography W. Giesecke, 'Das aitere romische Pfund', BMBl1922, 375-85 and 401-10. 'Die Entstehungszeit von Quadrigat, Denar und Victoriat', Deutsche MUnzblatter 1934-5, 181-91, 221-5 and 238-42. Italia numismatica. Eine Geschichte der italischen Geldsysteme bis zur Kaiserzeit, Leipzig, 1928. 'Das romische Drei-, Zwei- und Einskrupel-Gold', Frankfurter Miinzzeitung 1919, 101-16. E. Gjerstad, Early Rome iv, Synthesis of archaeological evidence, Lund, 1966. F. Gnecchi,' I bronzi quadrilateri della repubblica e la moneta privata dei Romani', RIN1900, 147-52. 'Monetazione romana. 1: Monete repubblicane. 11: Monete Imperiali', SNR 7 1898, 43-69 and 336-79 (plates corrected by Bahrfeldt, Nachtrdge ii, 8). P. ]. Goddard, 'The edict of Marius Gratidianus and the coinage of the Marians', SCMB 1969, 7-11542-3. F. W. Goethert, 'Summanus', MDAI(R) 1940, 233-6. F. R. D. Goodyear, Incerti auctoris Aetna, Cambridge, 1965. G. Gorini, 'Nuove considerazioni sul tesoretto di Padova', AIV 1968-9, 29-51. [Review of] M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican coin hoards, London, 1969, Athenaeum 1969, 330-2. J. W. Graham, 'X = 10', Phoenix 1969, 347-58. M. Grant, From imperium to auctoritas; a historical study of the aes coinage in the Roman Empire,
49 B.C.-A.D. 14, Cambridge, 1946. P. Grierson, The President's Address, NC 1963. G. T . Griffith, The mercenaries of the Hellenistic world, Cambridge, 1935.
W. H. Gross, 'Victoriatus', RE viii A, 2542-57. H. A. Grueber, 'The coinage of Luceria', Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic essays in honour of Barclay V. Head, London, 1906, 115-34. Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum, 3 vols. London, 1910, (revised edition) 1970. 'Roman bronze coinage from B.C. 45-3', NC 1904,185-244. H. Gundel, ' T . Quinctius Flamininus', RETOUV, 1075-6. E. Habel, 'Ludi publici', RE suppl. v, 608-30. Ch. Habicht, 'Samische Volksbeschlusse der hellenistischen Zeit', MDAI(A) 1957, 152-274. T. Hackens, 'Considerations sur le poids du denier romain vers la fin de la Republique', RBN 1962, 29-47. E. J. Haeberlin, Aes grave, Frankfurt, 1910. 'Ein falscher campanischer Barren nebst anderen Falsis', ZfN 1908, 145-60. 'Die jiingste etruskische und die alteste romische Goldpragung', ZfN 1908, 229-72. 'Die metrologischen Grundlagen der altesten mittelitalischen Miinzsysteme', ZfN 1909, 1-116 (see also C. F. Lehmann-Haupt). 'O. Viedebantts neu entdecktes "rdmisches Pfund"', NZ 1919, 85-114. 'Der Roma-Typus auf den Miinzen der romischen Republik', Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic essays in honour of Barclay V. Head, London, 1906, 135-55.
'Romisches Pfund und republikanische Silberpragung', Frankfurter Miinzzeitung, 1918, 391-400. Zum corpus nummorum aeris gravis. Die Systematik des altesten romischen Miinztuesens, Berlin, 1905.
'Zur Datierung des romischen Sesterzgoldes', Frankfurter Miinzzeitung 1919, 17-22. G. Hafner, Das Bildnis des Q. Ennius, Baden-Baden, 1968. 'Cn. Naevius und M. Claudius Marcellus', MDAI(R) 1968, 64-73. 'Der Kvltbildkopf einer Gottin im Vatikan'jJD^/ 1966, 186-205. ' Schild oder Rad? Beobachtungen zum Bildschmuck des Aes Signatum', JRGZ1963,34-43G. C. Haines and H. B. Mattingly, 'Roman Republican coinage. Some additions and corrections ', NCirc 1963, 146-50. H. P. Hall, 'Uncial dupondius overstruck on a sextantal as', NC 1933, 143-4. J. R. Hamilton, 'Cicero, Brutus 30 4-5', CQ 1968,412-13. ' T . Didius and the Villa Publica', NC 1955, 224-8. 806
Bibliography J. Hammer, 'Der Feingehalt der griechischen und rbmischen Miinzen. Ein Beitrag zur antiken Munzgeschichte', ZfN 1908,1-144. A. W. Hands, 'Pallas or Roma? The helmeted head on the early Roman denarii', NCirc 1900, 3724-32. G. M. A. Hanfmann, Observations on Roman portraiture, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1953 (Collection Latomus 11). J. G. Hawthorne, 'The myth of Palaemon', TAPhA 1958, 92-8. B. V. Head, Historia numorum. A manual of Greek numismatics, 3rd ed. by E. S. G. Robinson (Oxford, forthcoming). W. Helbig, Fiihrer durch die ijffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Allertumer in Rom, 4th ed. Tubingen, 1963. M. F. Hendy and J. A. Charles, 'The production trechniques, silver content and circulation history of the twelfth-century Byzantine trachy', Archaeometry 1970, 13-21. M. Henig,' The veneration of heroes in the Roman army. The evidence of engraved gemstones', Britannia 1970, 249-65. R. Herbig, 'Aes signatum', MDAK.R) 1956,1-13. 'Neue Studien zur Ikonographie des Gaius Iulius Caesar',Kolner Jahrbuch fur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte 1959, 7-14. 'Zur Ikonographie des Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix', WJA 1946, 108-10. C. A. Hersh, 'The Agrinion find and the problem of the chronology of the Roman Republican coinage during the second century B.C.', NC 1966, 71-93. 'Overstrikes as evidence for the history of Roman Republican coinage', NC 1953, 33-68. 'A quinarius hoard from Southern Italy', NC 1972, 75-88. 'Sydenham in retrospect. Revisions, corrections, and some rare and unpublished additions to that author's The coinage of the Roman Republic', Mints, dies and currency. Essays dedicated to the memory of Albert Baldwin, London, 1971, 9-32. [Review of] R. Thomsen, Early Roman coinage, 3 vols. Copenhagen, 1957-61, NC 1964, 341-53R. Herzog, 'Nummularius', RE xvii, 1415-55. G. Herzog-Hauser, ' Kaiserkult', RE suppl. iv, 806-53. J. Heurgon, 'C. Mamilius Limetanus a Caere', Latomus i960, 221-9. 'Les nummi de l'inscription du bois sacr6 de Luc6rie', BSFN 1963, 278-9. ' L'Ombrie a l'e'poque des Gracches et de Sylla', Problemi di storia e archeologia dell' Umbria, Gubbio and Perugia, 1966, 113-31. G. F. Hill, 'Ancient methods of coining', NC 1922, 1-42. 'The frequency table', NC 1924, 76-85. Historical Roman coins, from the earliest times to the reign of Augustus, London, 1909. [Review of] M. Bahrfeldt, Die romische Goldmiinzenprdgung wdhrend der Republik und unter Augustus. Eine chronologische und metrologische Studie, Halle, 1923, NC 1923, 361-7. O. Hirschfeld, Untersuchungen auf dent Gebiete der rb'mischen Vertvaltungsgeschichte i, Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian, Berlin, 1876. L. A. Holland, Janus and the bridge, Rome, 1961. R. Ross Holloway, 'Eagle and fuLrnen on the coins of Syracuse', RBN 1962, 5-28. The thirteen-months coinage of Hieronymos of Syracuse, Berlin, 1969. T. Rice Holmes, The architect of the Roman Empire i, 44 B.C.-27 B.C., Oxford, 1928. H. Hommel, 'Domina Roma', Die Antike 1942, 127-58. E. Hiibner,'Reisebericht aus Madrid 5. Mai 1861', MonatsberichteKPAW 1861, 525-50. E. G. Huzar, 'Egyptian influences on Roman coinage in the third century B.C.', CJ 1965-6, 337-46. F. Imhoof-Blumer, 'Beitrage zur Erklarung griechischer Munztypen', Nomisma. Untersuchungen auf dem Gebiete der antiken Munzkunde, v 1910, 25-42. F. Imhoof-Blumer and O. Keller, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, Leipzig, 1889. H. U. Instinsky, 'Schwurszene und Coniuratio', JNG 1964, 83-7. U. Jantzen, 'Caesar Mattei', MDAI(R) 1968, 170-3. H. Jeanmaire, La Sibylle et le retour de V&ge d'or, Paris, 1939. 807
Bibliography G. K. Jenkins, 'Notes on Iberian denarii from the Cordova hoard', ANSMusN 1958, 57-70. [Review of] L. Forteleoni, Le emissioni monetali della Sardegna punka, Sassari, 1961, NC 1963, 243-4. F. S. Johansen, 'Antichi ritratti di Caio Giulio Cesare nella scultura', Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 1967, 7-68. A. H. M. Jones, Studies in Roman government and law, Oxford, i960. J. R. Jones, 'Denarii, asses and assaria in the Roman Empire', BICS 1971, 99-105. J. H. Jongkees, 'Primitive imagines maiorum on coins of the Roman Republic', A Arch 1965, 233-9H. Jordan, Symbolae ad historiam religionum italicarum alterae, Konigsberg, 1883. St. Josifovid, Lykophron', RE Suppl. 30/925-30. H. Jucker, 'Auf den Schwingen des Gottervogels', JBM 1959-60, 266-88. 'Capitolium restitutum. Bemerkungen zu der Silbermiinze 5979', JBM 1959-60, 289-95. E. Jiingst and P. Thielscher, ' Cato und die Viktoriaten. Ein Beitrag zur Erklarung von Cato, De agr. c.15 und c.145', Philologus 1937-8, 331-43. H. Kahler, Der Fries vom Reiterdenkmal des Aemilius Paullus in Delphi, Berlin, 1965. R. Kampmann, 'As de la Republique romaine de frappe anormale', BSFN i960,400. B. Kapossy, 'Marsyas und die Politik der Populares', SMzB 1965, 74-9. P. Kehl, 'Ober Ursprung und Anfange von Geld, Kapital und offentlicher Finanzwirtschaft', Finanzarchiv 1950-1, 131-47. H. J. Kellner and W. Specht,' Feingehalt und Gewicht des romischen Denars \JNG 1961,43-51. F. Kenner, 'Die Roma-Typen', SAWW 24 1857, 253-95. D. Kiang, 'Colonia Iulia Viennensium', SMzB 1969, 33-6. D. Kienast, 'Imperator', ZSavStift 1961, 403-21. A. Kindler, 'Two Republican denarii illustrating contemporary events', SCMB 1951, 53-5. G. KlafTenbach, 'Eine neue Ehrenstatue fur T. Quinctius Flamininus', Chiron 1971, 167-8. A. Klugmann, 'Beitrage zur Numismatik der romischen Republik, aus einer Correspondenz', NZ 1886, 287-304. 'Due specchi di Bolsena e di Telamone', Annali 1879, 38-53. 'Die Formen, P, P-P, A-P u.s.w. auf den republikanischen Denaren', NZ 1878, 218-29. 'Die Typen der ahesten romischen Bigati', ZfN 1878, 62-72. R. Knapowski, Der Staatshaushalt der romischen Republik, Frankfurt-am-Main, 1961. Die Staatsrechnungen der romischen Republik in den Jahren 49-45 v. Chr., Frankfurt-am-Main, 1967. U. Knoche, 'Die augusteische Auspragung der Dea Roma', Gymnasium 1952, 324-49. C. Koch, Der romische Juppiter, Frankfurt-am-Main, 1937. Th. Koves, 'Valeria Luperca', Hermes 1962, 214-38. C. M. Kraay, 'Caesar's Quattuorviri of 44 B.C.', NC 1954, 18-31. 'The victoriate: a note on abbreviations', NC 1958, 39-41. K. Kraft, Der goldene Kranz Caesars und der Kampf urn die Entlarvung des" Tyrannen", Darmstadt, 1969 = JNG 1952-3, 7-97. 'Taten des Pompeius auf den Miinzen', JNG 1968, 7-24. G. Kruse, 'Thrinakos (Opfvaxos)', RE vi A, 607. W. Kubitschek, 'Der Arverner-Konig Bituitus', NZ 1913, 223-32. Studien zu Miinzen der romischen Republik, Vienna, 1911 (SAWW, 167). M. Lachaussee, ' Recherches sur la reduction progressive du poids des monnaies de bronze de la rdpublique romaine', RN 1911, 188-232, 313-34 and 407-22. L. Lacroix, 'Les "blasons" des villes grecques', Etudes d'archdologie classique 1955-6, 89-115. J. Lafaurie, 'Methode de fabrication des coins de deux monnaies de Severine', BSFN i960, 441-2. L. Laffiranchi, 'Alcuni problemi di geografia numismatica nella monetazione neopompeiana d'Hispania', RIN 1950-1, 91-9. 'Les deniers triomphaux de C. Valerius Flaccus', Demareteion 1935, 117-23. 'Gli assi di Sesto Pompeo coniati in Sicilia', Bollettino del Circolo Numismatico Napoletano 1917, 21-3. 'Nuovi testi numismatici sulle vittorie romane nel Ponto', Historia 1935, 39-68. 808
Bibliography P. Lambrechts, Attis. Van herdersknaap tot God, Brussels, 1962. J. A. O. Larsen, 'Some early Anatolian cults of Roma', Milanges d'archiologie et d'histoire offerts d A. Piganiol iii, Paris, 1966,1635-43. L. de la Saussaye, Numismatique de la Gaule narbonnaise, Blois, 1842. 'Le veritable Symbole de la nation gauloise de'montre' par les me'dailies', RN1840,245-60. K. Latte, Romische Religionsgeschichte, Munich, i960. B. Laum, Heiliges Geld. Eine historische Untersuchung iiber den sakralen Ursprung des Geldes, Tubingen, 1924. 'Ober den Ursprung der altromischen Geldbezeichnung "pecunia"', Finanzarchiv 1950-1, 352-60. A. Laumonier, Les cultes indigenes en Carie, Paris, 1958. M. Lazzarini, 'Le bilance romane del Museo Nazionale e dell'Antiquarium Comunale di Roma', RAL 1948, 221-52. 'Metrologia romana', Conimbriga 1965, 81-95. 'Palestrina. Basalte. Sette pesi', NSc 1907, 689. 'Una serie di pesi romani campioni', BCAR 1908, 69-76. Le Beau, 'De la 16gion romaine: de la paye du soldat legionnaire', Mimoires de littirature this des registres de VAcademic Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres xli, 1780, 181-205. H. Le Bonniec, Le culte de Cires a Rome, des origines a la fin de la Ripublique, Paris, 1958. Ph. Lederer, 'Beitrage zur romischen Miinzkunde', SNR 1942, 7-36. P. Le Gentilhomme, 'Les quadrigati nummi et le dieu Janus', RN 1934, 1-36. C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, 'Die neuromische Unze von 27g., eine alte Kupfereinheit, spater ev. auch fur Gold und Silber verwendet', Klio 1906, 525-8. 'Zur metrologischen Systematik. (Bemerkungen zu E. J. Haeberlins Abhandlung "Die metrologischen Grundlagen der altesten mittelitalischen Miinzsysteme")', ZfN 1909, 117-36 (see also O. Viedebantt, Antike Gewichtsnormeri). L. H. Lenaghan, 'Hercules-Melquart on a coin of Faustus Sulla', ANSMusN 1964, 131-49. Ch. Lenormant, 'Notice sur les deniers romains qui portent le nom de L. Valerius Acisculus', Nouvelles Annales publiees par la section francaise de I'Institut Archeologique 1838, 142-69. 'Sur un denier d'argent de la famille Cornelia', RN 1842, 245-52. F. Leo, Geschichte der romischen Literatur, Berlin, 1913. G. Le Rider,' Un groupe de monnaies cretoises a types athdniens', Humanisme actif. Melanges d'art et de Httirature offerts djulien Cain i, Paris, 1968, 313-35. A. J. Letronne, Considirations ginirales sur revaluation des monnaies grecques et romaines, et sur la valeur de for et de I'argent avant la decouverte de I'Amerique, Paris, 1817. B. Levick, 'Cicero, Brutus 43.159 ff., and the foundation of Narbo Martius', CQ 1971, 170-9. B. Levick and S. Jameson, 'C. Crepereius Gallus and his g e n s ' , ^ 5 1964, 98-106. J. Liegle, 'Ein Miinzbild des Sextus Pompeius', Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, organised and held in London by the Royal Numismatic Society, June 30-July 3, 1936 on the occasion of its centenary, London, 1938, 211-13. 'Pietas', ZfN 1935, 59-100. A. W. Lintott, 'Nundinae and the chronology of the late Roman Republic', CQ 1968, 189-94. ' Trinundinum', CQ 1965, 281-5. 'The tradition of violence in the annals of the early Roman Republic', Historia 1970, 12-29. Violence in Republican Rome, Oxford, 1968. A. de Longp6rier, ' Interpretation du type figure sur les deniers de la famille Hosidia et remarques sur l'orthographie et la pronunciation du grec en Italie', Mimoires de la Sociiti des Antiquaires de France 1852, 354-74 = Oeuvres ii, 287-300. T. J. Luce, 'Political propaganda on Roman Republican coins, circa 92-82 B.C.', AJA 1968, 25-39G. Lugli,' L'antica Norba', Enciclopedia italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti xxiv, Rome, 1934,926. N . Lupu, 'Aspekte des Miinzumlaufs im vorromischen Dakien', JNG 1967, 101-21. Due de Luynes, 'Monnaies des Nabatdens, RN 1858, 362-85. H. Lyngby, 'Columna Minucia', Eranos 1963, 55-62. 'Porta Minucia', Eranos 1961, 136-64. 809
Bibliography C. S. S. Lyon, 'The estimation of the number of dies employed in a coinage', NCirc 1965, 180-1.
T. O. Mabbott, 'The meaning of the types of Roman Republican bronze', Numismatic Review 7> 1 9 4 5 . 5 - n A. Magdelain, Recherches sur l'"imperiitm". La hi curiate et les auspices d'investiture, Paris, 1968. D. Magie, Roman rule in Asia Minor to the end of the third century after Christ, 2 vols. Princeton, 1950. A. Mamroth,' Numismatische Fehldeutungen', Berliner Numisntatische Zeitschrift 1955,165-70. G. Manganaro, 'Una epistola di Gerone II ai Siracusani (IG xiv 7)', Athenaeum 1965, 312-20.
'La monetazione a Siracusa tra Canne e la vittoria di Marcello (216-212 a.C.)', Archivio Storico per la Sicilia Orientate 1969, 283-96. J. Marquardt, De /''organisation financiere chez les Romains, Paris, 1888. N. Masquelier, 'Penates et Dioscures', Latomus 1966, 88-98. E. Mastrokostas, 'Inscriptions de Locride et de Thessalie', REA 1964, 291-319. H. Mattingly, 'Aes and pecunia: records of Roman currency down to 269 B.C.', NC 1943, 21-39. 'Aes signatum', Vjesnik Hrvatskoga Arheoloskoga Druztva 1937-40 = Serfa Hoffilleriana 537-45'Coinage and war-debts in the Roman Republic', Edinburgh Review 1926, 148-59. Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum i, London, 1923. 'The Diana-Victory didrachms and decadrachms of Arsinoe', NC 1946,63-7. 'The different styles of the Roman Republican coinage', NC 1952, 67-71. 'Dives Anagnia', NC 1946, 91-6. 'Doles in ancient Rome', Edinburgh Review 1927, 47-60. 'Eid Mar', AC 1948, 445. 'The first age of Roman coinage', JRS 1929,19-37. 'The first age of Roman coinage', JRS 1945, 65-77. 'The "little" talents of Sicily and the West', NC 1943, 14-20. 'Nomentanus', PCPhS 1950-1, 12-14. 'Notes on late Republican coinage', NC 1963, 51-4. 'Nummus und As. Ein Beitrag zur fruhromischen Munzpragung', SNR 1947, 5-15. 'The property qualifications of the Roman classes', JRS 1937, 99-107. Roman coins from the earliest times to the fall of the Western Empire, London, i960. 'Roman numismatics: further miscellaneous notes', PBA i960, 249-66. 'Roman numismatics: miscellaneous notes', PBA 1957, 179-210. 'The Romano-Campanian coinage and the Pyrrhic War', NC 1924, 181-209. 'The Roman "serrati"', NC 1924, 31-53. 'Some historical coins of the late Republic ',JRS 1922, 230-9. 'Some new studies of the Roman Republican coinage', PBA 1953, 239-85. 'Tribuni aerarii (?) on coins', PCPhS 1950-1, 27-9. 'Trinummus', NC 1963, 47-50. 'Various numismatic notes', PBA 1963, 313-43. 'The various styles of the Roman Republican coinage', NC 1949, 57-74. 'Zephyritis', AJA 1950,126-8. H. Mattingly and E. S. G. Robinson, "The date of the Roman denarius and other landmarks in early Roman coinage', PBA 1932, 211-66. 'Die Datierung des romischen Denars und andere Marksteine im fruhen rdmischen Miinzwesen', WG 1937, 69-80 and 300-19. 'The earliest coinage of Rome in modern studies', NC 1938, 1-35. 'Nummus', AJPh 1935, 225-34. 'The prologue to the Casina of Plautus', CR 1933, 52-4. 'Romano-Campanian coinage', NC 1932, 236-8. H. Mattingly and E. A. Sydenham, 'The retarimng of the denarius at sixteen asses', NC 1934, 81-91.
8lO
Bibliography H. B. Mattingly, 'The chronology of Terence', RCCM 1963, 12-61. 'The date of the Roman denarius: a reply', Congresso Internazionale di Numismatica 1961, Atti, Rome, 1965, 269-73. 'The denarius of Sufenas and the ludi Victoriae', NC 1956, 189-203. 'The foundation of Narbo Martius', Hommages d Albert Grenier iii, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1962, 1159-71 (Collection Latomus 58). 'New light on the Roman victoriate', Essays in Greek coinage presented to Stanley Robinson, Oxford, 1968, 210-28. 'Notes on some Roman Republican moneyers', NC 1969, 95-105. 'The numismatic evidence and the founding of Narbo Martius', RAN 1972, 1-19. 'Saturninus' corn bill and the circumstances of his fall', CR 1969, 267-70. 'The victoriate', N C 1957, 97-119. [Review of] M. H. Crawford, Roman Republican coin hoards, London, i$69,JRS 1970,231-2. [Review of] R. Thomsen, Early Roman coinage i-ii, Copenhagen, 1961, NCirc 1962, 139-41 and 163-5. F. Matz, 'Belli facies et triumphus', Festschrift fiir Carl Weickert, Berlin, 1955, 41-58. E. Mayer, 'Das Sauprodigium und sein religionsgeschichtlicher Hintergrund', AAntHung 1968, 198-208. E. Maynial, 'Observations sur un texte de Virgile [En&de, vi, 779-780]', MEFR 1904, 3-11. R. Meiggs, Roman Ostia, Oxford, i960. I. Merker, 'The silver coinage of Antigonos Gonatas and Antigonos Doson', ANSMusN i960, 39-52. A. Merlin, 'Decouverte d'une cuirasse italiote pres de Ksour-Es-Saf (Tunisie)', Monuments et Mimoires 1909, 125-37. Le Sanctuaire de Baal et de Tanit pris de Siagu, Paris, 1910. }. Mertens, Alba Fucens i, Brussels, 1969. E. Meyer, Rd'mischer Staat und Staatsgedanke, 3rd ed. Zurich and Stuttgart, 1964. P. Meyers,' Non-destructive analysis of ancient coins using charged particles and fast neutrons', Archaeometry 1969, 67-83. G. Micali, Monumenti inediti a illustrazione della storia degli antichi popoli italiani, Firenze, 1844. D. Michel, Alexander als Vorbild fiir Pompeius, Caesar und Marcus Antonius; archdologische Untersuchungen, Brussels, 1967 (Collection Latomus 94). A. K. Michels, The calendar of the Roman Republic, Princeton, 1967. C. Millan, 'Aspectos hispanicos de la familia Pompeia', Congresso Internazionale di Numismatica 1961, Atti, Rome, 1965, 293-300. J. G. Milne, 'The problem of the early Roman coinage\JRS 1946, 91-100. F. Miltner, 'Pompeius', RE xxi, 2050-253. G. Minervini, ' Osservazioni sopra una moneta della famiglia Veruria pubblicata dal sig. Capranesi', Bullettino 1841, 27-31. 'Studii Pompeiani - Caserma de' Gladiatori', Bullettino Archaeologico Napolitano 1858-9, 116-20. G. de Minicis, Numismatica Ascolana, Rome, 1857. T. E. Mionnet, De la rareti et du prix des medailles romaines; ou, recueil contenant les types des midailles frappies pendant la durie de la Ripublique et de VEmpire romain, Paris, 1815. S. Mirone, 'II tempio di Afrodite Ericina sul denaro di L. Considio Noniano', RIN 1918, 189-98. J. F. Mitchell, 'The Torquati', Historia 1966, 23-31. R. E. Mitchell, 'The fourth-century origin of Roman didrachms', ANSMusN 1969, 41-71. 'A new chronology for the Romano-Campanian coins', NC 1966, 65-70. H. Mobius, Alexandria und Rom, Munich, 1964. 'M. Junius Brutus', Archaiologike Ephemeris 1953-4, part 3, 207-11. 'Die Silberteller von Aquileja', Festschrift fiir Friedrich Matz, Mainz, 1962, 80-97. A. D. Momigliano, 'Camillus and Concord', CQ 1942, 111-20 = Secondo Contribute), 80-104. 'Due punti di storia romana arcaica', SDHI 1936, 373-98 = Quarto contributo, 32961. 811
Bibliography 'An interim report on the origins of Rome', JRS 1963, 95-121 = Terzo contribute, 545-98. 'Perizonius, Niebuhr and the character of early Roman tradition', JRS 1957, 104-14 = Secondo contribute, 69-87. Quarto contribute alia storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, Rome, 1969. Secondo contributo alia storia degli studi classici, Rome, i960, ed., Sources of ancient history (London, forthcoming). 'Sul dies natalis del santuario federale di Diana sull'Aventino', RAL 1962, 387-92 = Terzo contributo, 641-8. 'Terra Marique\JRS 1942, 53-64 = Secondo contributo, 431-46. Terzo contributo alia storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, Rome, 1966. 'Timeo, Fabio Pittore e il primo censimento di Servio Tullio', Miscellanea di Studi Alessandrini in memoria di Augusto Rostagni, Torino, 1963, 180-7 — Terzo contributo,
649-56. Trefiguremitiche. Tanaquilla, Gaia Cecilia, Acca Larenzia, Torino, 1938 = Quarto contributo, 455-85[Review of] A. Alfoldi, Early Rome and the Latins, Ann Arbor, 1965, JRS 1967, 211-16 = Quarto contributo, 487-99. [Review of] A. Alfoldi, Die trojanischen Urahnen der Rdtner, Basle, 1957, RSI 1958, 129-31 = Quarto contributo, 629-31. [Review of] A. N. Sherwin-White, The Roman citizenship, Oxford, 1939, JRS 1941, 158-65 = Secondo contributo, 389-400. [Review of] S. Tondo, //'sacramentum militiae' nell'ambiente culturale romano-italico, Rome,
1963.^51967,253-4. [Review of] Ch. Wirszubski, 'Libertas' as a political idea at Rome during the late Republic and early Principate, Cambridge, 1950, JRS 1951, 146-53. Th. Mommsen, 'Der Denar des Q. Salvidienus und die Schatze von Peccioli und Metz', ZfN 1884, 71-84. Geschichte des romischen Miinzwesens, Berlin, i860. Histoire de la monnaie romaine, 4 vols. Paris, 1865-75. Die rbmische Chronologie bis auf Caesar, Berlin, 1858, 2nd ed. Berlin, 1859. Romische Forschungen, 2 vols. Berlin, 1864-79. Romisches Staatsrecht, 3rd ed. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1887. 'Sopra alcuni ripostigli di denari romani scoperti nella Spagna', Annali 1863, 5-80. J.-P. Morel, 'Themes sabins et themes numaiques dans le monnayage de la republique romaine', MEFR 1962, 7-60. M. Gwyn Morgan, 'Villa Publica and Magna Mater. Two notes on manubial building at the close of the second century B.C.', Klio 1973, 215-45. G. Moroni, 'Appunti su alcune monete di Capua', R1N 1968, 97-113. R. Mowat, 'Un essai de denier roman avant la lettre', RIN 1903, 385-90. V. K. Muller, Der Polos, Diss. Berlin, 1915. F. Miinzer, 'Cornelius Sulla', RE iv, 1513-15. ' D . Iunius Brutus Albinus', RE suppl. v, 369-85. 'Fabius', RE vi, 1739-42. 'L. Flaminius Chilo', RE vi, 2503. 'L. Rubrius Dossennus', RE i A, 1171-2. 'M. Fonteius', RE vi, 2843-6. 'M. Maloleius', RE xiv, 918. '(Octavius?) Balbus', RE xvii, 1827-8. Romische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, Stuttgart, 1920. 'Servilii Caepiones', RE ii A, 1775-87. O. Murray, 'Philodemus on the good king according to Homer', JRS 1965, 161-82. D. Mustilli, / / Museo Mussolini, Rome, 1939. A. Nagl, Die Rechentafel der Allen, Vienna, 1914. E. Nash, Pictorial dictionary of ancient Rome, London, 1968. L. Naville, 'Fragments de m6trologie antique', SNR 1920, 42-60. 812
Bibliography 'La livre romaine et le denier de la loi salique', SNR 1920, 257-63. Les monnaies d'or de la Cyrinaique (450-250 av. J.C.). Contribution a Vetude des monnaies grecques antiques, Geneva, 1951. L. H. Neatby, 'The "bigatus"', AJA 1951, 241-4. L. H. Neatby and F. M. Heichelheim, 'The early Roman currency in the light of recent research', AAntHung i960, 51-85. G. Nenci, ' Considerazioni sulla storia delta monetazione romana in Plinio (Nat. Hist, xxxiii, 42-47)', Athenaeum 1968, 3-36. Pirro. Aspirazioni egemoniche ed equilibrio mediterraneo, Torino, 1953. 'Un prodigio dei signa nella battaglia di Ausculum e le origini di un topos fisiologico', RFIC 1955. 391-404. 'A proposito dei tipi di aes signatum col simbolo del tripode', PP 1963, 56-9. Cl. Nicolet, 'A Rome pendant la seconde guerre punique. Techniques financieres et manipulations monetaires', Annales (ESC) 1963, 417-36. 'Confusio surTragiorum. A propos d'une reforme electorate de Caius Gracchus', MEFR 1959. 145-210. 'Les equites campani et leurs representations figurees, MEFR 1962, 463-517. L'Ordre equestre a Vipoque ripublicaine (312-43 av.J.-C.) i, Paris, 1966. V. Nikiprowetsky, La troisieme Sibylle, Paris and The Hague, 1970. E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes, 2nd ed. Stuttgart, 1958. J. A. North, [Review of] P. Lambrechts, Attis, Brussels, 1962, JRS 1965, 278-9. A. O'Brien-Moore,' Senatus', RE suppl. vi, 660-800. R. M. Ogilvie, A commentary on Livy, Books 1-5, Oxford, 1965. 'Some cults of early Rome', Hommages a Marcel Renard ii, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1969, 56672 (Collection Latomus 102). J. H. Oliver, 'Octavian's inscription at Nicopolis', AJPh 1969, 178-82. A. degli Abati Olivieri-Giordani, ' Sopra alcune medaglie sannitiche', Saggi di dissertazioni accademiche pubblicamente lette nella nobile accademia etrusca deWantichissima cittd di Cortona iv, Rome, 1743, 133-48. S. I. Oost, 'Cyrene, 96-74 B.C.', CP 1963, 11-25. P. Orlandini,' Depositi votivi di bronzo premonetale nel santuario di Demetra Thesmophoros a Bitalemi', AIIN 1965-7, 1-20. W. G. A. Otto, Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6. Ptolemaers. Ein Beitrag zur Politik und zum Staatsrecht des Hellenismus, Munich, 1934. D. W. Packard, A concordance to Livy, 4 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 1968. R. Pagenstecher, Die calenische Reliefkeramik, Berlin, 1909. F.-H. Pairault, 'Diana Nemorensis. Deesse latine, deesse hellenisee', MEFR 1969, 425-71. £ . Pais, ' I nummi di L. Mussidius Longus ed il loro significato per la storia del triumvirato romano', RAL 1924, 15-24. G. Panimolle, Gli acquedotti di Roma antica, Rome, 1968. G. Pansa, 'L'officina monetaria di Lanuvio e gli attributi di Giunone Sospita', RIN 1913, 323-50. 'II tipo di Roma dei denari consolari e le sue imitazioni sulle monete delle colonie', RIN 1911, 199-208. A. Parisotti, 'Evoluzione del tipo di Roma nelle rappresentanze figurate dell'antichita classica', Archivio romano della R. Societd Romana di Storia Patria 1888, 59-148. A. Passerini, 'II concetto antico di Fortuna', Philologus 1935, 90-7. A. Pautasso, Le monete preromane dell'Italia settentrionale, Varese, 1966. C. Peyre,' Castor et Pollux et les Penates pendant la periode republicaine', MEFR 1962,433-62. J. Phelps, 'Examination of ancient coins', 69th Annual Report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller of the Royal Mint 1938, 55-6. J.A.Phillips, 'A chemical examination of the metals and alloys known to the ancients', Quarterly Journal of the Chemical Society of London 1852, 252-300. Ch. Picard, ' La date du buste en bronze de Caton d'Utique trouve a Volubilis, Maroc', Neue Beitrdge zur klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von B. Schweitzer, Stuttgart, 1954, 334-40.
813
Bibliography 'Dioscures cavaliers a la demi-monture fantomale', RA 1964, i, 195-200. Ephese et Claros. Recherches sur Us sanctuaires et Us cultes de I'lonie du Nord, Paris, 1922. G. Ch. Picard, Les trophies remains. Contribution a I'histoire de la religion et de Van triomphal de Rome, Paris,i957. B. Pick, 'Die vertieften Inschriften auf Miinzen der romischen Republik', Frankfurter Miinzzeitung 1917, 249-54. S. Piggott, 'The carnyx in early iron age Britain', The Antiquaries Journal 1959, 19-32. 'Celtic chariots on Roman coins', Antiquity 1952, 87-8. I. B. Pighi, De ludis saecularibus populi Romani Quiritium libri sex, 2nd ed. Amsterdam, 1965. K. Pink, 'Special coinages under the Triumviri Monetales', Essays in Roman coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Oxford, 1956, 55-62. S. B. Platner and T. Ashby, A topographical dictionary of ancient Rome, London, 1929. H. W. Pleket, 'Technology and society in the Graeco-Roman world', AHN 1967, 1-25. F. Poulsen, 'Probleme der Datierung fruhromischer Portrats', AArch 1942, 178-98. V. Poulsen, Les portraits romains i. Ripublique et dynastie julienne, Copenhagen, 1962. Fr. Prechac, 'Mater deum. Monnaies de la republique romaine', RN 1932, 119-25. M. J. Price, 'Coins from some deposits in the south stoa at Corinth', Hesperia 1967, 348-88. ' Early Greek bronze coinage', Essays in Greek coinage presented to Stanley Robinson, Oxford, 1968, 90-104. F. Quilling, Die Juppitersdule des Samus und Severus. Das Denkmal in Mainz und seine Nachbildung auf der Saalburg, Leipzig, 1918. K. Raddatz, Die Schatzfunde der Iberischen Halbinsel vom Ende des 3. bis zur Mine des 1. Jh. vor Chr. Geb. Untersuchungen zur hispanischen Toreutik, 2 vols. Berlin, 1969. A. E. Raubitschek,'Epigraphical notes on Julius Caesar', JRS 1954, 65-75. A. von Rauch, 'Ober die romischen Silbermiinzen und den innern Werth desselben', Mitteilungen der numismatischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin iii, 1857, 282-308. ' Ueber den innern Gehalt und den Metallwerth griechischer und rdmischer Silbermiinzen nach preussischen Gelde', ZfN 1874, 32-42. E. J. P. Raven, 'The amphictionic coinage of Delphi 336-334 B.C.', NC 1950, 1-22. 'The Hierapytna hoard of Greek and Roman coins', NC 1938, 133-58. B. Rawson, 'Pompey and Hercules', Antichthon 1970, 30-7. G. W. Reece, 'The technological weakness of the ancient world', G & R 1969, 32-47. R. Reece, 'Analyses of some denarii of the later Republic and early Roman Empire', NC 1964, 233-4. A. Reinach, 'L'origine du Marsyas du Forum', Klio 1915, 321-37. S. Reinach, 'La colonne historiee de Mayence', RA 1913, 25-30. Th. Reinach, Les monnaies juives, Paris, 1887. M. Renard, 'Aspects anciens de Janus et de Junon', RBPh 1953, 5-21. 'Hercule allaite par Junon', Hommages dJ.Bayet, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1964, 611-18 {Collection Latomus 70). 'Le nom de Junon', Phoibos 1950-1, 141-3. G. Riccio, Catalogo di antiche medaglie consolari e di famiglie romane, Naples, 1855. Le monete delle antiche famiglie di Roma fino allo Imperatore Augusto, 2nd ed. Naples, 1843. J. C. Richard, 'Pax, Concordia et la religion officielle de Janus a la fin de la Republique romaine', MEFR 1963, 303-86. J.-C. M. Richard, 'Les monnaies gauloises "a la croix" et le tresor de Lattes (Herault, France)', JNG 1970, 49-62. J.-C. M. Richard, Y. Solier and A. Riols, 'D6couverte de monnaies gauloises a la Croix faite a Moussan (Ande) en 1967', Bulletin de la Commission archdologique de Narbonne 1968, 1-10.
G. M. A. Richter, Ancient Italy, Ann Arbor, 1955. Catalogue of engraved gems, Greek, Etruscan and Roman, 2nd ed. Rome, 1956. Gems of the Romans, London, 1971. 'Was Roman art of the first centuries B.C. and A.D. classicizing?', JRS 1958, 10-15. 814
Bibliography Sir William Ridgeway, 'The Romano-Campanian coins with head of Mars (obv.) and a horse's head (rev.)', PCPhS 1925, 26-8. E. Rink, Die bildlichen Darstellungen des romischen Genius. Diss. Giessen, 1933. L. Robert, Bulletin ipigraphique 1950, 68 = REG 1950, 188. E. S. G. Robinson, 'Carthaginian and other south Italian coinages of the second Punic War', NC 1964, 37-64. 'Punic coins of Spain and their bearing on the Roman Republican series', Essays in Roman coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Oxford, 1956, 34-53. 'Some problems in the later fifth-century coinage of Athens', ANSMusN i960,1-15. 'A south Italian hoard', NC 1945, 96-107. G. Rolandi and F. Cremascoli, 'L'argento di alcune monete antiche', Industria Mineraria 1953, 255-6. W. H. Roscher, Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie, 6 vols. Leipzig, 1884-1937. A. Rosenberg, 'Romulus', RE i A, 1074-104. R. F. Rossi, Marco Antonio nella lotta politico delta tarda repubblica romana, Trieste, 1959. G. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani. Elenco cronologico con una introdueione sull'attivitd legislativa dei comizi romani, Milan, 1912. R. J. Rowland, 'The Italians and Saturninus', CP 1969, 38-40. 'Numismatic propaganda under Cinna', TAPhA 1966, 407-19. 'Saturn, Saturninus, and the sodi', CP 1967,185-9. J. Rubino, Beitrdge zur Vorgeschichte Italiens, Leipzig, 1868. G. E. M. de Sainte-Croix, 'Greek and Roman accounting', Studies in the history of accounting, by A. C. Littleton and B. S. Yamey, London, 1956,14-74. A. von Sallet, 'Beitrage zur antiken Miinzkunde', Z/N 1885, 358-86. E. T. Salmon, 'The coloniae maritimae', Athenaeum 1963, 3-38. 'Colonial foundations during the Second Samnite War', CP 1963, 235-7. Roman colonisation under the Republic, London, 1969. Samnium and the Samnites, Cambridge, 1967. J. W. Salomonson, 'De afspiegeling van eenpolitiek conflict op Romeinse denarien uit het jaar 53 voor Chr.', JMP 1954, 1-10. A. Sambon, ' Sur la classification des intailles italiotes avec le secours de la numismatique', Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic essays in honour of Barclay V. Head, London, 1906, 275-84. K. Samwer and M. Bahrfeldt, 'Geschichte des alteren romischen Munzwesens bis circa 200 v. Christi (554 der Stadt)', NZ 1883, 5-215. A. Santarelli, Notizia di un ripostiglio di denari consolari trovato a Pieve Quinta nel Forlivese, Forll, 1879. M. Sarstrbm, A study in the coinage of the Mamertines, Lund, 1940. I. Sauerwein, Die leges sumptuariae als rb'mische Massnahme gegen den Sittenverfall, Diss. Hamburg, 1970. L. F. J. C. de Saulcy, Systime monitaire de la ripublique romaine a Vipoque de Jules Cisar, Paris, 1873. H. Schaefer,' Vigintiviri', RE viii A, 2570-87. H. J. Scharp, 'De dateering van het oudste goudgeld uit Rome's Munthuis, 242 of 217 voor Chzr.JMP 1918, 1-18. F. Schiassi, Del ritrovamento di medaglie consolari e difamiglie, Bologna, 1820. R. Schilling, La religion romaine de Vinus depuis les origines jusqu au temps d'Auguste, Paris, 1954. E. Schmidt, Rdmerbildnisse vom Ausgang der Republik, Berlin, 1944 (103. Winckelmannsprogramm der archaologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin). U. W. Scholz, Studien zum altitalische und altrdmische Marskult, Heidelberg, 1970. A. Schulten, Numantia iv, Die Lager bei Renieblas, Munich, 1929. O. Th. Schulz, 'Das dritte Triumvirat Octavians', ZfN 1935,101-27. B. Schweitzer, Die Bildniskunst der rdmischen Republik, Weimar, 1948. K. Scott, 'The political propaganda of 44-30 B.C.', MAAR 1933, 7-49. H. H. Scullard, Scipio Africanus: soldier and politician, London, 1970.
815
Bibliography A. Segre, Metrologia e circolazione monetaria degli anlichi, Bologna, 1928. D. G. Sellwood, 'Some experiments in Greek minting technique', NC 1963, 217-31. C. Seltman, 'Argentum oscense and bigati', NC 1944, 77-82. 'The wardrobe of Artemis', NC 1952, 33-51. P. P. Serafin, 'Nota sull'argento suberato della repubblica romana', AI1N 1968, 9-28. F. Serrao, 'Appunti sui patroni e sulla legittimazione all'accusa nei processi repetundarum', Studi in onore di P. de Francisci ii, Milan, 1956, 471-511. H. Scyrig, 'Un portrait de Jules Cesar', RN 1969, 53-4. D. R. Shackleton Bailey, Cicero's letters to Atticus, 7 vols. Cambridge, 1965-71. 'The Roman nobility and the second Civil War', CQ i960, 253-67. R. K. Sherk, Roman documents from the Greek East. Senatus consulta and Epistulae to the age of Augustus, Baltimore, 1969. E. Simon, 'Neue Literatur zum Caesarportrat', Gymnasium 1957, 295-9. J. Six, ' Ikonographische Studien v. Titus Quinctius Flamininus', MDAI(R) 1894, 112-17. M. Sordi, Roma e 1 Sanniti nel iv secolo a.C, Bologna, 1969. A. Stazio, 'Nummus in Plauto', Numismatica 1948, 19-23. 'Nuovi argomenti per una vecchia teoria. Novita sul problema del denarius', AIIN 1958-9, 344-7P. Stein, Die Senatssitzungen der ciceronischen Zeit (68-43), Diss. Miinster, 1930. P. Stein, 'Trinummus', ANSMusN 1966, 65-9. E. Stoicovici and I. Winkler, 'Studiul constitufiei §i compozijiei unor monede amice prin cercetari metalografice', Acta Musei Napocensis (Cluj) 1967, 449-56. H. Strasburger, Concordia ordinum. Eine Untersuchung zur Politik Ciceros, Borna, 1931. 'Triumviri aere argento auro flando feriundo', RE vii A, 515-18. D. E. Strong, Roman Imperial sculpture. An introduction to the commemorative and decorative sculpture of the Roman Empire down to the death of Constantine, London, 1961. E. Strong, 'The art of the Roman Republic', Cambridge Ancient History ix, Cambridge, 1932, 803-41. M. Stuart, 'The denarius of M'. Aemilius Lepidus and the Aqua Marcia', AJA 1945, 226-51. G. V. Sumner, 'Manius or Mamercus?', JRS 1964, 41-8. 'The Lex Annalis under Caesar', Phoenix 1971, 246-71; 357-71. C. H. V. Sutherland, The Cistophori of Augustus, London, 1970. Coinage in Roman Imperial policy, 31 B.C.-A.D. 68, London, 1951. 'The intelligibility of Roman imperial coin types\JRS 1959, 46-55. 'What is meant by style in coinage?', ANSMusN 1950, 1-12. B. Svoboda, 'The silver lanx as means of propaganda of a Roman family', JRS 1968, 124-5. J. N. Svoronos, Ta voplaiiaTa TOO Kpci-rous TCOV n-roAEnaiaw, Athens, 1904. J. W. Swain, 'The theory of the four monarchies. Opposition history under the Roman Empire', CP 1940, 1-21. E. A. Sydenham, The coinage of the Roman Republic, London, 1952. 'The date of Piso-Caepio', NC 1940,164-78. 'The origin of the Roman serrati', NC 1935, 209-30. 'Ornamental detail as a guide to the classification of Republican denarii', NC 1941, 117-27. 'Problems of the early Roman denarius', Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress, organised and held in London by the Royal Numismatic Society, June 30-July 3, 1936 on the occasion of its centenary, London, 1938, 262-75. 'Symbols on denarii of L. Papius and L. Roscius', NC I93i> i-*3. 'The victoriate', NC 1932, 73-95. Sylloge nummorum Graecorum. England v, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Part i(A) Italy, EtruriaLucania (Thurium), edited by C. M. Kraay, London, 1962. Part 11 Italy, Lucania (Thurium)Bruttium, Sicily, Carthage, edited by C. M. Kraay, London, 1969. R. Syme, 'The historian Servilius Nonianus', Hermes 1964, 408-24. 'Imperator Caesar. A study in nomenclature', Historia 1958, 172-88. 'Missing senators', Historia 1955, 52-71. 'Piso Frugi and Crassus Frugi', JRS i960, 12-20. 816
Bibliography The Roman revolution, Oxford, 1939. 'Sabinus the muleteer', Latomus 1958, 73-80. Sallust, Cambridge, 1964. 'Senators, tribes and towns', Historia 1964, 105-25. 'The stemma of the Sentii Saturnini', Historia 1964, 156-66. 'Ten tribunes', JRS 1963, 55-60. [Review of] A. E. Gordon, Potitus Valerius Messalla consul suffect 29 B.C., Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1954, JRS 1955, 155-60. W. W. Tarn, 'Alexander Helios and the golden age', JRS 1932, 135-60. 'The Triumvirs', Cambridge Ancient History x, Cambridge, 1934, 31-65. L. R. Taylor, 'Cicero's aedileship', AJPh 1939, 194-202. The divinity of the Roman emperor, Middletown, Connecticut, 1931. 'Magistrates of 55 B.C. in Cicero's Pro Plancio and Catullus 52', Athenaeum 1964, 12-28. Roman voting assemblies from the Hannibalic War to the dictatorship of Caesar, Ann Arbor, 1966. 'Symbols of the augurate on coins of the Caecilii Metelli', AJA 1944, 352-6. The voting districts of the Roman Republic, Rome, i960. E. Thevenot, 'La figuration du Genie de Lyon', RAE 1959, 94-107. G. Thiele, Antike Himmelsbilder, Berlin, 1898. H. Thiersch, 'Zum "Zeus Zichy'", NGG 1928, 93-134D. B. Thompson, Troy. The terracotta figurines of the Hellenistic period, Princeton, 1963. M. Thompson, The Agrinion hoard, New York, 1968. The new style silver coinage of Athens, 2 vols. New York, 1961. W. E. Thompson, 'The polden Nikai and the coinage of Athens', NC 1970, 1-6. R. Thomsen, Early Roman coinage, 3 vols. Copenhagen, 1957-61. 'Quadrigatus', RE xxiv, 686-708. Th. Thomson, 'Memoire sur les monnaies d'argent', Annales de Chimie lxxi 1809, 113-38. G. Tibiletti, 'Le leggi de iudiciis repetundarum fino alia Guerra Sociale', Athenaeum 1953, 5-100. ' Marsyas, die Sklaven und die Marser', Studi in onore di Emilio Betti iv, Milan, 1962,349-59. G. Tomassetti, 'II musaico marmoreo colonnese', MDAK.R) 1886, 3-17. J. Tondriau, 'Romains de la republique assimiles a des divinites', SO 1949, 128-40. J. M. C. Toynbee, The art of the Romans, London, 1965. 'Picture-language in Roman art and coinage', Essays in Roman coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Oxford, 1956, 205-26. G. Traversari, Museo Archeologico di Venezia. I ritratti, Rome, 1968. M. Treu, 'Zur dementia Caesars', MH 1948, 197-217. M. Troussel, 'L'elephant celeste', RSAC 1957-9, 3-24. V. Vazquez Queipo, Essai sur les systemes mitriques et monitaires des anciens peuples, Paris, 1859. A. Vercoutre, 'Un denier de Lucius Cassius Caecianus', CRAI1890, 246-7. 'Les types des monnaies frappees par Manius Aquillius et par Publius Clodius a Peffigie du soleil', RN 1890, 377-84. 'Les types du denier frappe par L. Cassius Coecianus', ASFN 1891, 21-6. C. C. Vermeule, A bibliography of applied numismatics in the fields of Greek and Roman archaeology and the fine arts, London, 1956. Some notes on ancient dies and coining methods, London, 1954. O. Vessberg, 'A new portrait of Cato the Younger,' Kunsthistorisk Tidskrift 1952, 1-5. Studien zurKunstgeschichte der romischen Republik, Lund, 1941. P. Veyne, 'Le Marsyas colonial et l'independance des cites', RPh 1961, 87-98. O. Viedebantt, Antike Gewichtsnormen und Miinzfiisse, Berlin, 1923. Forschungen zur Metrologie des Altertums, Leipzig, 1917 (see also E. J. Haeberlin). 'Semis', RE ii A, 1348. L. Villaronga Garriga, Las monedas de Arse-Saguntum, Barcelona, 1967. F. de Visscher, Lesfouilles a"Alba Fucens (Italie centrale) de i p j i a 1953, Brussels, 1955. A. Vives y Escudero, La moneda hispdnica, Madrid, 1926. H. Volkmann, 'Caesars letzte Plane im Spiegel der Munzen', Gymnasium 1957, 299-309. 817
Bibliography H. M.-L. Vollenweider, 'Das Bildnis des Scipio Africanus', MH 1938, 27-45. ' Un Episode de la vie du general Pompee le Grand', Homtnages d Marcel Renard iii, BruxellesBerchem, 1969, 655-61 (Collection Latomus 103). 'Die Gemmenbildnisse Casars', AK i960, 81-8 = Gymnasium 1964, 505-18. Die Steinschneidekunst und ihre Ktinstler in spdtrepublikanischer und augusteischer Zeit, BadenBaden, 1966. 'Der Traum des Sulla Felix', SNR 1958-9, 22-34. ' Verwendung und Bedeutung der Portratgemmen fur das politische Leben der romischen Republik', MH 1955, 96-111. W.-H. Waddington, 'Un voyage en Asie-Mineure au point de vue numismatique', RN 1853, 245-54. F. W. Walbank, A historical commentary on Polybius, 2 vols. Oxford, 1957-67. 'Political morality and the friends of Scipio', JRS 1965, 1-16. 'The Scipionic legend', PCPhS 1967, 54-69. G. Walser, 'Die Victoria des L. Munatius Plancus', 0E6OPIA. Festschrift fur W.-H. Schuchhardt, Baden-Baden, i960, 217-23. L. Bonfante Warren,' Roman triumphs and Etruscan kings: the changing face of the triumph', JRS 1970, 49-66. A. Watson, 'The development of the praetor's edict', JRS 1970, 105-19. G. R. Watson, 'The pay of the Roman army, the Republic', Historia 1958, 113-20. P. H. Webb, 'The beginnings of Roman coinage', The President's Address, NC 1934. C. Weickert, 'Ein romisches Relief aus der Zeit Caesars',Festschrift Arndt, Munich, 1925,48-61. S. Weinstock, Divus Julius, Oxford, 1971. 'Nonae caprotinae', RE xvii, 849-59. 'Pax and the "Ara p&as"', JRS i960, 44-58. 'Two archaic inscriptions from Latium', JRS i960, 112-18. 'Victor', RE viii A, 2485-500. 'Victor and invictus', HThR 1957, 211-47. [Review of] A. Alfoldi, Die trojanischen Urahnen der Rimer, Basle, 1957, JRS 1959, 170-1. [Review of] H. Erkell, Augustus, Felicitas, Fortuna, Goteborg, 1952, J7J.S 1955, 187-8. [Review of] K. Latte, Romische Religionsgeschichte, Munich, i960, JRS 1961, 206-15. N.-W. Weissmuller, Caesars Vorstellung von seiner Regierungsform, Idee und Wirklichkeit, Diss. Miinster, 1969. A. B. West, 'Lucilian genealogy', AJPh 1928, 240-52. L. C. West, Gold and silver coin-standards in the Roman Empire, New York, 1941. R. West, Rimische Portratplastik, 2 vols. Munich, 1933-41. K. D. White, Agricultural implements of the Roman world, Cambridge, 1967. L. T. White, Medieval technology and social change, Oxford, 1962. H. B. Wiggers, 'Zur Geschichte und Deutung des Dreibeins', Festgabe Peter Berghaus, Miinster, 1969, 5-21. H. Willers, Geschichte der romischen Kupferpragung vom Bundesgenossenkrieg bis auf Kaiser Claudius, Leipzig and Berlin, 1909. 'Die Miinzen der romischen Kolonien Lugudunum, Vienna, Cabellio und Nemausus', NZ 1902, 79-138. 'Das Rohkupfer als Geld der Italiker (etwa 1000-343 v. Chr.)', ZfN 1924,193-283. 'Die romische Goldpragung vom Jahre 209 v. Chr.'. Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic essays in honour of Barclay V. Head, London, 1906, 310-24. R. Winkes, Clipeata imago. Studien zu einer romischen Bildnisform, Bonn, 1969. Ch. Wirszubski,' Libertas' as a political idea at Rome during the late Republic and early Prindpate, Cambridge, 1950. T. P. Wiseman, 'The census in the first century B.C.', JRS 1969, 59-75'The definition of "Eques Romanus" in the late Republic and early Empire', Historia 1970, 67-83. 'Lucius Memmius and his family', CQ 1967,164-7. New men in the Roman senate, 139 B.C.-A.D. 14, Oxford, 1971. 'Prosopographical notes', NC 1964, 157-8. 8l8
Bibliography 'Roman Republican road-building', PBSR 1970, 122-52. 'Some Republican senators and their tribes', CQ 1964, 122-33. 'T. Cloelius of Tarracina', CR 1967, 263-4. 'Two friends of Clodius in Cicero's Letters', CQ 1968, 297-302. 'Two more senators', CQ 1965,158-60. G. Wissowa, Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur romischen Religions- und Stadtgeschichte. Ergdnzungsband zu des Verfassers 'Religion und Kultus der Rdmer', Munich, 1904. Religion und Kultus der Rdmer, 2nd ed. Munich, 1912. J. de Witte, 'L'arc de Triomphe d'Orange', RA 1887, 2, 129-37. 'Camie reprisentant Octavie, soeur d'Auguste', Gazette Archiologique 1875, 121-4. 'La conqufite de la Gaule meridionale par les Romains', Mimoires de la Sociiti Nationale des Antiquitis de France 1882, 342 and 348. P. Wolters, 'Das alteste Bild der Roma', Festschrift H.Wdlfflin. Beitrdge zur Kunst- und Geistesgeschichte, Munich, 1924, 9-18. B. Wosnik, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Sullas, Diss. Wiirzburg, 1963. E. Wust, 'Odysseus', RE xvii, 1905-96. Z. Yavetz, Plebs and Princeps, Oxford, 1968. P. Zazoff, [Review of] M.-L. Vollenweider, Die Steinschneidekunst und ihre Kunstler in spa'trepublikanischer und augusteischer Zeit, Baden-Baden, 1966, Gnomon 1969, 198-200. H. Zehnacker, 'L'iconographie pomp£ienne et les styles numeraires a la fin de la Republique romaine', Congresso Internazionale di Numismatica 1961, Atti, Rome, 1965, 283-92. 'Le monnayage de L. Rubnus Dossenus et la victoire d'Esculape', Hommages a Jean Bayet, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1964, 739-48 (Collection Latomus 70). 'Premiers portraits realistes sur les monnaies de la republique romaine', RN 1961, 33-49. 'Quadrans ratitus', Hommages a Marcel Renard iii, Bruxelles-Berchem, 1969, 695-707 (Collection Latomus 103). G. Zinserling, 'Studien zu den Historiendarstellungen der romischen Republik', WZJena 1959-60, 403-48.
819
CONCORDANCES l. Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham
Crawford
p. 10*
42/2 13/1 13/2 17/ia-b 17/id 17/ie
1 2
3 3a 3b 3C
17/lg
3d 4 5 5a 6 7 8 9
p. 565, no. 306*
10
n
Sydenham
p. 566, no. 308*
40 41
27/7 27/8 27/9
42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
15/1 16/ia 16/10 20/1
27/3 14/1 14/2 14/3 14/4 14/5
Crawford
36a 37 38 39
21/7
27/5 27/6
27/10
25/4 25/5 25/6 25/7 25/8 25/9
does not exist
50 5i 52
26/5 26/6
53
does not exist
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
14/6
54
14/7 18/1 18/2
55 56 57 58 59
26/7 26/8
20 21
23 23a 24
18/6 22/1 22/1 26/4 27/1 27/2 25/1
24a
p. 565 n. 1
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
25/2
12
21a 22
33 34 35
36
18/3 18/4
18/5
60 61 62
63 63a
64-5 and 66
25/3 26/1 26/2
26/3 23/1 21/1 21/2 21/3 21/4 21/5 21/6
24/1 24/2
24/3 24/4 24/5 24/6a 24/7 24/7 67-70 pp. 103-5 42/1
71 72
35/1 35/1
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 79a
35/2
80
80a 80b 81
820
does not exist
35/3 35/4 35/5 35/6 36/1 36/2 36/2 var. 36/33 36/3D p. 553, no. 126* 36/4
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham 82
83 83* 84
Sydenham
Crawford
36/5 53/1
133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142
90/1
Crawford 98/2
98/6 98/7 98/8 98/ib 37/ia 37/ic 44/5
86 87 88
p. 554, no. 130* 38/5 38/6 38/7 38/8
89 90
38/1 38/2
9»
38/3 38/4
143
56/2
143a
39/1 39/2
143b 143c
39/3 39/4 39/5
143d I43e I43f
56/3 56/4 56/5 56/6 56/7 56/8
41/1 4i/3a 4i/3b 41/4 41/53
144 145
85
92
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 99a 100 101
101a 102
103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112
113 114 U5 116 117 118 119 120 121
121a 122
123 124 125 126
44/6
44/7
41/9 41/10 41/11
149 150
50/2 50/3 50/4 62/1 61/1 61/2 61/3 61/4 61/5 61/6 61/7 61/8 59/i 59/2
does not exist 93/ia-b 71/ia 95/ia-b 95/2
150a 150b 150c I5od I5oe
102/1 94/1 103/1 101/1
59/3 59/4 59/5 59/6 59/7
151 152 153 154
52/1 83/2
p. 555, no. 139* 92/ia 97/ia-b 97/ic 43/i 43/2a 43/2b 43/3a 97/5a
155
145a 146 147 148
4i/5b 41/6a 4i/7a 4i/8a 4i/7b 4i/8b
127 (misread)
97/5C
128 129 130 131 132
43/4 43/5 43/6 27/4 98/ia and IC
148a 148b 148c I48d
I48e I48f
156 157
157a 157b 157c
I57d 158 159 160
821
83/3 105/3 107/ia-c 63/1 63/2 63/3 63/4 63/5 63/6 106/3 64/1
160a 160b 160c
64/3 64/4 64/5 64/6a
161 162
65/1 65/2
Concordances Sydenham
Crawford
Sydenham
162a 162b 162c i62d 163 164 164a 164b 164c 164c! i64e 165 166 167 168 169
190a 190b
Crawford
84/5 84/6 191 68/ib 191a 44/5 192 44/6 72/3 193 194 72/4 72/11 195 72/12 195a 195b 72/13 195c 72/14 72/15 I95d does not exist I95e 196 73/1 73/2 197 75/ia-b 198 74/1 199 200 74/2 201 76/1 76/2 202 203 76/3 203a 76/5 76/6 203b 204 104/ib 204a 104/ia 104/ia 204b 205 129/1 130/1 206 206 n. 131/1 80/lb 207 207a 53/2 78/1 208 106/1 209 210 106/4 112/4 210a 89/2 211 212 89/ia 213 89/3 213a 89/4 89/6 213b 213c 89/7 does not exist 213d 80/ia 214 80/2 215 215a 80/3 215b 80/4 58/2 216 217 58/1 218 58/3 218a 58/4 218b 5 8/ 5 a 218c (wrongly described) 2i8d 58/7a 58/8 2i8e 219 57/2
65/3 65/4 65/5 65/6 108/1 60/2 60/3 60/4 60/5 60/6 60/7 109/1 45/1 44/5 44/5 44/6 170 60/ia and IC 171 5i/i 172 p. 554, no. 132* p. 562, no. 245* »73 85/ia 174 174a 85/ib 85/2 175 175a 85/3 175b 85/4 175c 85/5 85/6 • I75d I75e 35/7 176 97/2 176a 98/3 177 98/43 178-I78f cf. 97 (inadequately described) I78g 97/8 179 97/ii 180 97/7b 181 86A/1 181a 102/2a 182 does not exist 182s 86A/2 182b 86A/3 182c 86A/4 i82d 86A/5 iO3/2a-b 183 184 103/2C 101/2 185 186 87/1 186a 87/2 186b 87/3 186c 87/4 i86d 87/5 187 84/1 188 84/2 189 84/3 190 84/4 822
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham 220 221
2213 221b 221C
22ld 22ie 222
223 224
224a 224b 224C 224d 224c 225 226 227 228 229 230 231
231a 231b 231c 23id 23ie 232 233
233a 234 235 236 237
238 238a 238b 238c 238d 238e 239 240 241 242 243
243a 243b 243c 244
245 245a 245b 245c 245d 246 17
Sydenham
Crawford
247 248 248a 248b 248c 248d 248e
57/1 57/3 57/4 57/5 57/6 57/7 57/8 88/2 83/ia 88/3a 88/4 88/5 88/6 88/7 88/8 77/1 44/2 44/3 44/4 53/2 53/1 56/2 56/3 56/4 56/5 56/6 56/7 88/1 105/2 105/1 72/2 72/1 50/1 165/1 194/1 194/2 194/3 194/4 194/5 194/6 106/2 H2/2a 112/2b 112/1 does not exist does not exist H2/6a H2/7b 114/1 114/2 "4/3 H4/4 114/5 does not exist 119/2
249 250 251
251a 251b 251c 25id 252
253 254 254a 254b 254c 254d 255 256 257 257a 257b 257c 258 259 260
260a 260b 260c 26od 261 262 263 264
264a 264b 264c 264d 264c 265 266 267
267a 267b 267c 267d 267c 268
268a 269 270
823
Crawford 119/1 119/3 H9/4 H9/5 119/6 H9/7 119/8 122/2 122/1 122/3 122/4 122/5 122/6 122/7 121/2 121/1 121/3 121/4 121/5 121/6 121/7 120/2 120/1 120/3 120/4 120/5 120/6 124/2 124/1 124/3 124/4 124/5 124/6 124/7 117A/1 p. 556, no. 152* 113/1 113/2 and 196/1 113/3 and 196/2 113/4 196/3 196/4 196/5 57/2 57/1 137/2 137/3 137/4 137/5 137/6 does not exist 115/1 115/1 p. 556, no. 150* 168/2 CRC II
Concordances Sydenham 271 272
272a 272b 272c 272d 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 279a 280 281 282
283 284 284a 284b 284c 284d 285 286 287 288 289 290
290a 291 292
292a 292b 292c 293
293a 293b 293c 293d 294
294a 294b 294c 295 296
296a 296b 296c 296d 296e 297 297a 297b 297c
Sydenham
Crawfora 168/1 118/1 118/2 118/3 118/4 118/5 does not exist 125/1 126/1 111/1 127/1 110/ia 110/2 110/3 116/ib 116/ia 135/1 182/1 182/2 183/3 183/4 183/5 183/6 171/1 170/1 152/ib 152/ic 169/1 128/1 128/1 172/1 117B/1 117B/3 117B/4 117B/5 i45/i 145/2 145/3 145/4
297d 297e 298 298a 298b 298c 298d 298e 299 299a 299b 299c 299d 299e 300
300a 300b 300c 3ood 3ooe 301 301a 301b
Crawford 183/5 183/6 i95/i 195/2 195/3 195/4 195/5 195/6 142/1 142/2 142/3 142/4 142/5 142/6 144/1 144/2 144/3 144/4 144/5 144/6 86B/1
86B/2 p. 549, no. 37* and p. 555, no. 140* 301c p. 549, no. 37* and p. 555, no. 140* 30id p. 549, no. 37* and p. 555, no. 140* 302 56 56/1 303 304-3046 (inadequately described) 97/23 305 306 99/1 306a 99/3 306b 99/5 99/6 306c 306d 99/7 99/8 3o6e 306f 99/9 99/2b 307 99/2a 308 99/4 309 100/1 309a 100/2 309b 100/3 309c 3O9d ioo/4b 309c ioo/4a 100/5 30 9 f ioo/6a 3O9g 100/7 3O9h 69/1 310 69/2 310a
H5/5
181/1 181/2 181/3 181/4 184/ib 184/ia 184/2 184/3 184/4 184/5 184/6 183/1 183/2 183/3 183/4 824
Sydenham-Crawford denham 310b 310c
3iod 3ioe 3iof 311 312 313 3i4
315 316
316a 316b 316c 3i6d 317 318 319
319a 3i9b 319c 3i9d 320 321
321a 321b 321c 32id 32ie 3 2lf 321g 32ih 322
323 324
324a 324b 324c 324d 325 326 327
327a 327b 327c 327d 327e 328 329
329a 329b 329c 329d 330 331
Crawford
Sydenham 331a 331b 332 332a 333 333a 333b 333C 333d 334 334a
69/3 69/4 69/6 p. 555, no. 136* p. 555, no. 136* 167/1 158/1 166/1 137/1 57/1 137/2 137/3 137/4 137/5 137/6 132/2 132/1 132/3 132/4 132/5 132/6 132/7 162/2 162/1 162/3 162/4 i62/5a i62/6a 162/78 i62/5b i62/6b i62/7b 159/2 159/1 159/3 159/4 159/5 159/6 159/7 163/1 136/1 136/2 136/3 136/4 136/5 136/6 136/7 161/1 161/2 161/3 161/4 161/5 161/6 155/1 155/2
335 336 337 337a 337b 337C
337d 337e 338 339 340 341
34ia 342
342a 343 344 344a 345 346 346a 346b 346c 346d 346e 346f 346g 347 348 349 35O 351
352 353 353a 353b 353C
353d 353e 354 354a 354b 354C 354d
825
Crawford 155/3 155/4 134/ia 134/ib 134/2 134/3 134/4 134/5 134/6 i33/2b i33/2a 133/3 133/1 133/4 133/5 133/6 133/7 133/8 133/9 139/1 140/1 157/1 146/1 146/1 p. 549, no. 44* p. 556, no. 160* 156/1 156/3 156/4 141/1 141/23 141/33 141/43 141/53 141/6 141/3b i4i/4b I4i/5b 154/1 153/1 147/1 147/2 138/1 137/1 177/1 177/2 177/3 177/4 177/5 does not exist 179/1 179/2 179/3 179/4 179/5 17-2
Concordances Sydenham 355 355a 355b 355c 355d 356 356a 356b 356c 356d 356e 357 358 358a 358b 358c 358d 359 359a 359b 359c 360 360a 360b 360c 36od 361 361a 361b 361c 36id 362 362a 362b 362c 362d 363 363a 363b 363c 363d 364 364a 364b 364c 364c 365 365a 365b 365c 365c 366
Crawford 174/1 174/2 174/3 174/4 174/5 191/1 191/2 191/3 191/4 191/5 196/6 175/1 176/1 176/2 176/3 176/4 176/5 187/2 187/3 187/4 187/5 173/1 173/2 173/3 173/4 173/5 180/1 180/2 180/3 180/4 180/5 188/1 188/2 188/3 188/4 188/5 does not exist 190/1 190/2 190/3 190/4 190/6 185/1 185/2 185/3 185/4 185/5 185/6 150/1 150/2 150/3 150/4 150/5 150/6 193/1
Sydenham 366a 366b 366c 366d
367 367a 367b 367c 367d 367c
368 368a 368b 368c 368d
369 369a 369b 369c 369d 370 37oa 370b 370c 37Od 371 371a 372 372a
372b 372c
373 373a 373b 373C
373d
373e 374 375 375a 375b 375C 375d
376 377 378 378a 378b 378c
379 379a 380 381 381a 381b
826
Crawford 193/2 193/3 193/4 193/5 148/1 and 215/2C 148/2 148/3 148/4 148/5 148/6 178/1 178/2 178/3 178/4 178/5 149/ia i49/2b H9/3a i49/4a 149/58 189/1 189/2 189/3 189/4 189/5 p. 549, no. 47* 151/1 192/1 192/2 192/3 192/4 186/1 186/2 186/3 186/4 186/5 does not exist
211/1 i43/i i43/2a 143/3 143/4 143/5 197/ia 199/ia 199/2 199/3 199/4 199/5 202/ia 202/ib 201/1 201/2 201/3 201/4
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham
Sydenham
Crawford
381c 38id 38ie 382 383 383a 383b 383c 383d 383e 384
201/5 201/6 201/7 200/1 200/2 200/3 200/4 200/5 200/6 does not exist 204/1 204/2 385 385a 204/3 204/4 385b 204/5 385c 204/6 385d 386 205/1 205/2 387 387a 205/3 205/4 387b 205/5 387c 388 206/1 206/2 389 206/3 389a 206/4 389b 206/5 389c 206/6 389d 390 208/1 207/1 391 392 210/1 210/2 393 210/3 393a 393b 210/4 210/5 393c 210/6 393d 210/7 393e 209/1 394 209/1 394a 215/1 395 396 215/28 396a 215/2b 396b p. 550, no. 59* 396c 215/3 396d 215/4 396e 215/5 215/6 396f 39<Sg 215/7 397 (plated hybrid) 398 214/ib 398a 398b 398c 398d
399 399a
Crawford
399b 214/4 214/5 399C 214/6 399d 214/7 399e 400 (plated[ hybrid) 401 (plated hybrid) 402 216/1 216/1 402a 403 2i6/2a 403a 216/3 403b 2i6/4a 403c 216/5 403d 216/6 404 218/1 405 406
406a 407
407a 407b 407c 408 409 410 411 412 413
414 415 416
416a 417 418 419
p. 549, no. 48* 219/ia 219/ib 219/2 219/3 219/4 219/5 220/1 221/1
278/1 219/ie 220/1 221/1 278/1 279/1
p. 548, no. 21* 279/2 274/1
274/3
275/1 419a (plated hybrid) 420 275/2 420a 275/3 421 277/1 422 277/2 276/1 423 187/1 424 217/1 425 426 217/2 426a 217/3 426b 217/4 426c 217/5 426d 217/6 427 203/ia 203/2 428 428a 203/3 428b 203/4 428c 203/5 428d 203/6 229/1 429 p. 557, no. 185* 430
214/ia 214/ib 214/ic 214/ic 214/2 214/3 827
Concordances Sydenham 430a
431 432 433 433a 434 434a 435 435a 435b 436 437 437a 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 446a 447 447a 448 448a 449 450 451 452 452a 452b 452C 452d 452e 452f 452g 453 453a 453b 453C 454 455 456 457 457a 457b 457C
458 459 459a 460 460a 460b
Crawford p. 557. no. 185* 197/ib 231/1 231/2 231/3 232/1 232/1 232/2 232/3 232/4 223/1 p. 557, no. 182* p. 557, no. 182* 222/1 197/ib 228/2 228/1 228/4 224/1 225/1 226/1 227/ia-c 227/1 d p. 550, no. 62* p. 557, no. 184* 230/1 p. 563, no. 251* does not exist 237/1 238/1 238/2 238/33
Sydenham
460c 46od 461
461a 462
462a 463 464
464a 464b 464c 464d 465 466 467 467a 467b 467c 467d 467c
246/5 p. 550, no. 69*
does not exist 253/3
475 476 477 478
254/1 258/1 259/1 265/1 265/2 265/3 263/ia 263/ib 263/ib var. 263/2 263/33 263/4 263/5a 263/5b 264/1
471a 471b 472
473
479 479a 480
480a
480b 481 482
482a 482b 482c 483 483a 484
484a 484b 485 486
486a 486b
828
242/5 238/1 246/1 246/2 246/3 246/43
474a 474b
470 471
251/1 251/2 251/3 251/4 228/2 233/1 241/ia 241/2 241/3 241/4 241/5 227/ia-c 240/ia 240/ib 240/2 240/3 240/4
does not exist
474
469a
238/3f does not exist does not exist
240/5 240/6 235/ia 235/ic 235/2 235/3 242/1 242/2 242/3 242/4
246/4b 247/1 247/2 247/3 248/1 248/2 248/3 248/4 252/1 253/1 253/2
468 469
does not exist 238/3b-d
Crawford
does not exist
264/2 264/3 264Mb
269/1 269/2 269/4 256/2b
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham 486c 486d 487 488 488a 489 490 491
491a 491b 491c 492
493 493a 493b 494 495 495a 495b 496 497 497a 497b 497C 498 499 499a 499b 500 501
501a 502 503 504
505 506
506a 506b 507 508
508a 508b 508c 509 510
510a 510b 510c 511 512
512a 512b 513
5H 515
Crawford
Sydenham
256Mb does not exist 250/1 250/2 250/3 236/1 244/1 244/2 244/3 244/4 244/5 249/1 249/2 249/3 249/4 243/1 243/2 243/3 243/4 262/1 262/2 262/3 262/4 262/5 271/1 271/2 271/3 p. 558, no. 198* 245/1 245/2 245/3 266/1 266/2 266/3 267/1 267/2 267/3 267/4 257/1 257/2 257/3 257/4 257/5 256/1 256/2a 256/3 256/48 p. 550, no. 71* 255/1 255/2 255/3 255/4 270/1 261/1 261/2
515a 515b 515c 516
Crawford
261/3 261/4 261/4 260/1 268/ia 517 517a 268/lb p. 547, no. 1* 518 79/1 519 520 282/5 521 282/2 522 282/4 282/4 522a 282/1 523 523a 282/1 282/3 524 239/1 525 526 239/2 526a 239/3 526b 239/4 527 234/1 527a 234/1 528 234/2a 234/2b 528a 281/1 529 287/1 530 280/1 531 273/1 532 273/2 533 p. 547, no. 18* 533a 286/1 534 285/1 535 285/1 var. 535a 536 (plated hybrid) 285/2 537 285/2 537a 538 285/3 285/4 538a 538b 285/5 538c 285/6 538d 285/7 284/ia 539 284/ib 539a 540 302/1 540a 302/1 var. 283/ia 541 541a 283/ib 54ib 283/ib 542 310/1 543 309/1 286/1 544 295/1 545 p. 563, no. 262* 545a 546 289/1 289/2 547 547a 289/3
829
Concordances Sydenham 547b 547C 548 549 549a 549b 549c 550 551 552 552a 552b
553 554 555 556 556a 556b
556c 556d 557
558 559 560 56i-56ie 562 562a 562b
563 564 565 566-566a 566b 567 567a 568 568a 568b 569 570 570a 571 571a 572 573 573a 573b 573C 574 574a 575 575a 575b 576
576a
Crawford 289/4 289/5 292/1 292/2 292/3 292/48 292/4b 294/i 293/1 293/2 293/3 does not exist 288/1 291/1 290/1 290/2 290/3 290/4 290/5 290/6 303/1 304/1 305/1 305/2 296/1 296/2 296/3 296/4 297/1 298/1 306/1 307/ib-d 307/ia 308/ia 308/ib 302/2 302/3
Sydenham 576b 576c 577 577a 577b
578 578a 579 580 581 581a 582 582a 583 584 585 586 586a 586b 587 588
589 590 591 592 593 593a 594 595 596 596a 597 597a 597b 597c 598 599
3O2/4a
600
300/1 299/ia 299/ib 301/1
600a 601 602
603 603a 603b 604 604a 604b 604c 605 605a 606 607 608 608a 608b
301/1 var.
312/1 312/2 312/3 312/4 does not exist 313/ib 313/ic 313/2 313/3 313/4 311/ia 311/lb 830
Crawford 311/ic-d 311/ie 3i4/ib 314/ic 314/id 3i7/3a 3i7/3b 317/1 317/2 p. 551, no. 83* p. 551, no. 83* 318/ia 318/ib 326/1 326/2 323/1 332/ia 332/ib 332/ic 33i/i 333/1
322/ia 322/ib 322/2 3i9/i 320/1 320/1 321/1 336/ib-c 343/ia-b 343/ic 343/2b 343/2b 343/2b 343/2b 316/1 324/1 325/ib 325/ia 328/1 327/1 330/ia 330/ib p. 559, no. 209* 329/ia 329/ib 329/ia 329/ib 329/ic 329/id 329/2 334/1 334/2 334/3 334/4
Sydenham-Cravaford Sydenham 6o8c 6o8d 609 609a 609b 609c 610 611
611a 612
612a
612b 612c 613
613a 614 615
615a 615b 615c 616
616a 616b 616c 6i6d 644
644a 645
645a 645b 645c 645d 646
646a 647 648 649
649a 650-67id 672
672a 672b 672c 672d 672e 672f 672g 672h 673
673a 673b 674 675 676
676a
Crawford 334/5 334/6 373/ia 373/ib 373/ib 373/ib 373/ib 335/ia 335/ib-c 335/ioa 335/ioa 335/lob 335/iob 335/9 335/9 335/2 335/3a-b 335/3c-e 335/3f 335/38 335/4 335/5 335/6 335/7 335/8 337/ib 337/ia 337/2C 337/2C 337/2d 337/2e-f 337/2a 337/3 337/3 var. 337/4 P. 559, no. 212* 337/5 p. 559, no. 212*
Sydenham
Crawford
does not exist 676b 677 340/4 340/5a 677a 340/5b 677b 677c 34O/6a 340/6C 6 7 7d 678 338/i 678a 338/2 678b 338/3 678c 338/4 679 339/i 679a 339/2 and 350B/1 339/3 and 350B/2 679b 339/4 and 350B/3 679c p. 559, no. 213* 679d 679c p. 559. no. 213* 680 p. 566 681 p. 566 682 p. 566 683 342/3b 683a 342/3b 683b 342/38 684 342/5b 684a 342/5b 684b 342/5b 684c 342/5b 342/4b 685 685a 342/4b 685b 342/4b 686 342/4a 342/6a 687 688 342/2 689 342/1 690 342/7b 690a 342/7b 690b 342/7d 690c (wrongly described) 69Od 342/7d 69oe (wrongly described) 690f 342/8b 69Og 342/9a 691 341/1 692 341/2 693 341/3 694 341/4a 694a 34l/4b 694b 34i/4d 695 341/5 696 341/6 697 341/7 698 344/ia 698a 344/ib 698b 344/ic 699 344/2b 699a 344/2C
340/1 34°/2e 340/2f 34o/2e 34o/2f 340/2e 34o/2f 340/2e 340/2g 34o/2g 340/2b 34o/2d 34o/2d 34o/2a 240/2C 34o/3a 340/3b
831
Concordances Sydenham 700
Crawford
700a 700b
344/3 344/3 344/3
701
344/4C
Sydenham 728-728f 729 730 731 73ia 73ib 731c
701a 344/4a 701b (wrongly described) 344/ 4 b 701c 7Oid 344/5C 7Oie 344/7 702 345/1 703 345/2 704 345/3 704a 345/4 705 348/1 706 348/2 707 348/3 708 348/4 709 348/5 710 348/6 p. 559, no. 217* 711 711a 348/7 711b P- 559. no. 217* 712 349/1 346/1 713-713E 346/2 7i4~7l4f 715 346/4 715a 346/4 716 346/3 716a 346/5 717 35i/i 717a 351/1 718 371/1 369/1 719 720 721
721a 721b 721c 72id 72ie 722
722a 722b 722c 722d 722e 723
724 724a 724b 725 725a 725b 726
727
732
733 734 735 735a 735b
736 736a
737 737a-f
738 738a
739 740 741 742 742a 742b 743 744 744a 744b 745 746 747 747a 747b 748 748a 748b 748c 748d 748e 748f 748g 749 750 751 752 752a
370/1 35OA/13 35OA/ib 350A/IC 35OA/id 35OA/ie
does not exist 35OA/3a 35OA/3b 350A/3C 35OA/3d 35OA/3e 35OA/3f 350A/2
353/ia 353/ic 353/id
753 754 755 756
353/3 does not exist does not exist 353/2 does not exist
756a
757 757a
832
Crawford
352/ia and c 352/ib 352/3 355/ic 355/ia 355/id 355/if 355/ih 354/1 354/2 354/3b 356/ia 356/ib 356/ic 360/ia 360/ib
363/id 363/ia-c 361/ib 361/ic
357/lb 357/ia 362/1 364/1 b 364/ic 364/id
377/1 378/ia 378/ib 378/ic 372/1 372/2 365/ic 365/ia 365/ib 366/ia 366/ib 366/ic 366/2a 366/2b 366/3C 3 66/ 3 a 366/3b 366/4 374/1 374/2 393/ia 393/ib 549/1 375/1 375/2 367/4 367/4 367/5 367/5
Sydenhcan-Crawford Sydenham
Sydenham
Crawford
Crawford
758 759
367/2 367/3
798 799
401/1 405/ib
760
359/1
800
760a
359/1 359/2
800a
405/ib 405/ib
800b
405/lb
762
359/2 381/ia
801 802
405/2 p. 559, no. 2 2 2 *
762a
381/ib
803
4O5/4b
763
376/i p. 000 p. 000
803a
405/4b var. 405/43
761 761a
764 765 766 767 768 769 769a 769b 770
804 805 806 807 808 809
3o8/4b 368/1 380/1 382/ia 382/ib 382/ib
810 811 812
770a
383/1 383/1
771
379/1
772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779
379/2
386/1
820a
780
387/1 387/1 388/ia 388/ib
821
780a
781 781a
782
783 784 785 785a 786 786a 787 787a 788 789 789a
813 814 815 816 817 818 819
384/1
385/1 385/2
385/3 385/4 385/5
819a
820
821a
822
823 824 825 826 827 828
389/1 390/1 39O/2
394/ia 394/ib 39i/ia 39i/ib
828a
39i/3 391/3 391/2 392/ib 392/1 a
829 830
790 791
395/1 397/1
831 832
791a
p. 564, no. 284*
792
396/ia 396/ib
399/ia 399/10
833 834 835 835a 836 837 837a 838
403/1
839
792a
793 794 795 796 796a 797
828b
830a 830b 830c
398/1 400/ia 400/ib
833
4O5/3b 405/38 405/5 409/2 409/1 410/1 410/23 4io/2b 410/3 410/6 410/5 410/4 410/ioa 410/iob
4io/7b 410/73 410/7C 4io/7d 4io/9b 410/9C 4io/9a 410/8 418/23 4i8/2b 418/1 419/ia 419/id 419/ie 419/ic 419/ia 419/ib 419/ic 419/id 4i9/ie 419/2 419/2 4i9/3a 4i9/3b 411/ib 411/ib 411/ib 411/ia 411/ia 406/1 406/1
Concordances Sydenham 840-878 879 880 881 881a 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 889a 890 890a 891 892 893 894 894a 895 896 897 898 899 900 901
901a 902
902a 903 903a 904 905 906 906a 907 908 909 909a 910
910a 911
911a 911b 911c 912
913 914 915 916 917 917a 918
Crawford 408 426/1 426/2 426/2 var. 426/2 426/48 426/40 426/3 421/1 424/1 424/1 424/1 barbarous p. 564, no. 289* 423/1 423/1 var. 437/ia 437/ib p. 559, no. 223* 437/za 437/2a var. 437/2b 437/3» 437/3b 437/4a 437/4b 429/1 429/2a 429/2b 414/1 414/1 407/2 407/2 var. 407/1 404/1 433/1 433/1 433/2 434/1 434/2 434/2 var. 420/ia 420/1 b 42o/2a 420/2C 42O/2d 42O/2b 422/ia
Sydenham 919 919a 919b 919c
936 937 937a 938 939 939a 939b 940 941 941a 942 943 943a 943b 944 945 946 947 948 948a 949 950 951 95ia 952 952a 953 954 954a 954b 955 956 956a
425/1 425/1 does not exist 425/1 427/1 427/2 442/1 (non-Roman) 415/1 415/1 var. 415/1 var. 417/1 416/1 430/1 436/1 436/1 438/1 431/1 432/1 435/1 413/1 p. 564, no. 287* 441/1 p. 559, no. 224* 440/1 444/ia p. 559, no. 225* 444/ib 444/ic 450/ia 450/ib 450/2 450/38 450/3b 450/3C 451/1 449/3 449/2 449/ia 449/ib 449/ic 449/4 449/5 448/ia 448/ib 448/23 448/2b 448/3 454/1 454/1 454/1 454/2 454/3 454/3
957
454/4
920 921 922
923-5 926 926a 926b 927 928 929 930 930a 93i 932 933 934
935
422/lb 422/ib var. 412/1 428/3 428/1 428/1 428/2
834
Crawford
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham 958 959
959a 959b 960
960a 961 962
962a 963 964 965 966
Sydenham
Crawford 454/5 453/ia 453/ib 453/ic 473/1 473/1 var. 473M 473/3 does not exist 473/4
Crawford
991
465/23 465/2b 992 465/3 465/4 993 465/5 994 465/63 995 995a 465/6C 996 465/78 996a 465/7b 996b 465/6d 465/8a 997 997a 465/8a 997b 465/8b 997c 4 6 5 /8b 998 474/ia 998a 474/ib 474/2a 999 999a 474/2b 999b 474/2C 1000 474/3a 1001 474/3b 1002 474/5 1003 474/4 1004 474/6 1005 474/7 1006 443/1 1007 (non-Roman) 1008 452/1 1009 452/2 1010 452/4 1011 452/5 1012 452/3 1013 458/1 1014 468/1 1015 468/2 1016 482/1 1017 466/1 1018 466/1 1018a 466/1 1019 475/ia 1019a 475/ia 1019b 475/ib 1020 475/2 1021 481/1 1022 457/1 1023 467/13 1024 467/lb 1025 476/ia 1026 476/ib 1027 457/1
991a
472/1 472/2
472/3 472/3 var. 967 472Mb 968 472/4C 969 472/4a 970 455/ia 455/2a 971 972 455/3 455/4 973 974 455/5 975 455/6 976 463/ib 976a 463/ib 976b 463/ib 976c 463/ia 977 463/3 978 463/2 463Mb 979 463/4d 979a 979b 463/48 980 463/5b 980a 463/53 980b (wrongly described) 981 463/6a 981a (wrongly described) 982 464/2 464/2 982a 464/2 982b 464/1 983 983a 464/1 983b 464/1 984 464/3 var. 984a 464/38 984b 464/38 985 464/5 986 464/4 464/6 987 988 464/7a 988a 464/7b 989 464/83 989a 464/8b 990 465/ia 99oa 465/lb 966a
1028 1029 1029a 1030 1031
835
402/1
445/ib 445/ia 445/2 445/3b
Concordances Sydenham 1031a 1031b 1032 1033 1034 1035 1035a 1036-1039 1040 1041-1043 1044 1044a 1044b 1045 1045a 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1053a 1054 1054a 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1071a 1072 1073 1073a 1074 1074a 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080
Crawford does not exist 445/32 446/1 447/ia 447/ib 469/ia-c 469/id 470 47i/i 477 479/1 479/1 479/1 478/ia 478/ia 459/1 460/1 460/2 460/3 460/4 461/1 462/ic 462/ia 462/ib 462/2 462/2 480/17 480/3 48o/2a 480/23 480/28 480/4 480/8 48o/7b 480/6 480/1 480/24 480/26 480/16 480/15 480/19 480/18 48o/sb 48o/5a 480/11 480/10 480/9 480/13 480/14 480/20 480/21 480/22 480/25 does not exist 480/27
Sydenham 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1090a 1090b 1091 1092 1093 1093a 1093b 1094 1094a 1095 1096 1096a 1096b 1096c 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1103a 1104 1104a 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1114a 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124
836
Crawford 515/1 515/2 513/1 513/2 513/3 5H/1 514/2 485/2 485/1 494/44a 494/45 494/44b 494/46 494/41 494/42a 494/420 494/42C 494/43a 494/43° 494/40 494/39a 494/39« does not exist 494/39a 494/8b 494/9a 494/7b 494/14 494/15 494/13 494/2a 494/2b 494/3° 494/3a 494/1 494/24 494/25 494/26a 494/27 494/28 494/29 494/30 494/31 494/20b 494/2oa 494/21 494/22 494/23 494/5 494/6a 494/4 494/17 494/18 494/16 494/19
Sydenham-Crawford Sydenham
Sydenham
1125 1126 1127 1128
1169
496/3
1170 1171 1171a 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1179a 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1193a 1194 1195 1196
496/2 516/4 516/4
Crawford does not exist 525/1 525/2 525/3 1128a ( = B. Sempronia 11 var., which is really S. 1129a) 1129 525/43 1129a 525/4C 1130 526/1 1131 526/3 1132 526/2 1133 526/4 1134 512/1 1135 512/2 1136 494/35 1137 494/34 1138 494/36 1139 494/37 1140 494/38 1141 494/11 1142 494/12 1143 494/10 1144 494/32 1145 494/33 1146 (plated hybrid) 1147 439/1 1148 486/1 1148a 486/1 1149 487/1 1150 487/28 1151 487/2b 1152 487/2C 1153 49i/ia 1154 49i/ib 1155 491/2 1156 489/2 1156a does not exist 1157 489/1 1157a p. 565, no. 296* 1157b does not exist 1157c does not exist 1158 489/3 1158a 489/3 1159 489/4 1160 489/5 1161 492/2 1162 492/1 1163 489/6 1164 p. 551, no. 103* 1165 488/1 1165a 488/1 1166 488/2 1166a 488/2 1167 493/1 1168 496/1
Crawford
516/5 516/1 516/2 53i/i 519/1 519/2 521/1 521/2 521/2 517/ia 517/2 517/3 517/6 5i7/4a 517/53 517/5C
517/7 517/8 520/1 522/2 522/4 528/ib 528/2a 528/2b 528/3
529/4b 527/1
1197 (non-Roman) 1198 (non-Roman) 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1210a 1210b 1211 1211a 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217
837
533/2 533/33
533/3b 536/4 536/1 536/3 539/1 541/1 541/2 542/1 542/2 543/1 543/1 543/1 545/1 545/2 544/1
544/8 544/12 544/13 544/14 544/15
Concordances Sydenham
Crawford 1218 544/2 1219 544/17 544/16 1220 1221 544/18 1222 544/3 1223 544/19 544/20 1224 1225 544/21 1226 544/22 1227 544/23 1228 544/24 1229 544/25 1230 544/26 1231 544/9 1232 544/5 1232a 544/27 1233 544/28 1234 544/29 1235 544/30 1236 544/31 1237 544/32 1238 544/1O 1239 544/33 1240 544/11 1241 544/34 1242 544/35 544/36 1243 1244 544/37 1245 544/38 1246 544/39 1247-1253 p. 552, no. 117* 1254 530/1 1255-1276 (non-Roman) 1277 450/2D 450/2d 1277a 1278 450/3 1279 546/1 1280 546/2 128oa 546/3 128l 546/4 1282 546/6 1283 546/7 1284 546/8 1285 does not exist 1286 484/1 501/1 1287 1288 506/3 1289 502/1 502/2 1290 502/3 1291 502/4 1292 503/1 1293 1294 504/1 1295 506/1 1296 506/2
Sydenham
Crawford
1297 507/ib 1297a 507/ia 1298 507/2 1299 508/1 1300 508/2 1301 508/3 1302 498/1 1303 499/1 500/4 1304 1305 500/5 1306 500/2 500/3 1307 1308 500/1 1309 500/6 500/7 1310 1311 505/1 1312 505/2 1313 5O5/3 1314 505/4 510/1 1315 1316 490/3 518/2 1317 1318 490/1 1319 497/1 1320 497/3 1321 490/2 1321a 490/2 1322 497/2 1323 495/2 1323a 495/2 1324 490/4 1325 p. 552, no. 112* 1325a 518/1 1326 523/ib 1326a 523/ib 1326b 523/ia 1327 529/1 1327a 529/2a 1327b 529/2b 1328 529/3 1329 534/1 1330 534/2 1331 534/3 1332 537/1 1333 537/2 1333a 538/2 538/1 1334 1335 535/1 1336 535/2 1336a p. 566, no. 310* 540/1 1337 54O/2 1338 1339 (Imperial) 1340-1343 (non-Roman) 511/33 1344
838
Sydenham-Crawford Crawford
Sydenham
Sydenham 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359
511/30 511/1
1345 1346 1346a 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351
p. 560, no. 239* 511/2 511/43 5H/4d 483/2 483/1
Crawford 509/1 .509/2 509/5 509/4 524/1 524/2 532/1 547/1
2. Babelon-Crawford Babelon
B. i, p. 32, no. p. 67, no. p. 72, no. p. 77, no. p. 77, no. ABURIA
ACCOLEIA ACH.IA
244/1 244/2
3 4 5 6 7 8
244/3 244/4 244/5
1
486/1
1
11
271/1 271/2 271/3 255/1 255/2 255/3 255/4 442/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman)
1 2
75/ia-b
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 AEMH.IA
1 2
18
Babelon
Crawford 308/40 222/1 287/1 350A/2 373/1
1 2
2
AELIA
50 101 176 226 227
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
250/1 250/2
250/3
20 21 22
23 24 25 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
111/1
233/1 336/1 (non-Roman) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
AFRANIA
1 2
3 4 5
176/1 (non-Roman)
839
Crawford 176/2
176/3 176/4 176/5 291/1 422/ib 422/ia 415/1 417/1 480/1
480/4 480/8 48o/7b 480/78 480/6 480/24 480/26 419/id 419/ic 419/ia 419/2 419/2 419/3 489/2 489/2 489/3 489/3 489/1 p. 565, no. 296* 492/2 495/1 495/2 494/1 494/13 494/7b 494/10 206/1 206/2 206/3 206/4 206/5 CRC It
Concordances Babelon 6 (ii p. 592) 6 bis
Crawford 206/6 206/7
ALLIENA
1
457/1
ANNIA
1 2
366/4 366/1 366/2 366/3C 366/3a-b (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
3 4 5 6 7 8 ANTESTIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 ANTIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 ANTONIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8
Babelon
Crawford
p. 565, no. 296* 10 489/2 11 489/2 12 489/3 489/3 13 529/1 14 15 529/3 16 529/2a 529/2b 17 18 529/2C 19 494/5 20 494/17 21 494/2a 22 494/2b 23 494/14 24 494/8a 494/8b 25 26 494/32 494/11 27 28 (wrongly described) 496/2 29 p. 552, no. 106* 30 496/3 31 32 489/6 33 527/1 496/1 34 520/1 35 492/2 36 528/ib 37 528/2b 38 492/1 39 40 528/3 41 493/1 42 529Mb 516/1 43 516/2 44 516/4 45 46 516/5 5i7/4a 47 48 5i7/5» 49 517/3 50 5i7/ia 517/2 51 52 517/6 517/7 53 517/8 54 521/1 55 521/2 56 522/4 57 522/1 58 522/2 59 (non-Roman) 60 61 (non-Roman) 62 (non-Roman) 53i/i 63
9
219/ie 219/ia 219/ib 219/2 219/3 219/4 219/5 219/6 238/1 238/2 238/38 does not exist 23«/3f does not exist does not exist (plated hybrid) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 455/1 455/2 455/3 455/4 455/5 455/6 does not exist 364/1 480/22 p. 551, no. 103* 488/1 488/2 488/2 489/4 489/1
840
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 ill 112 ii3 114
"5 116 117 118
Crawford (non-Roman) 530/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 533/1 533/3a 533/3° (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 536/1 536/4 536/3 does not exist 533/2 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 541/2 54i/i (non-Roman) 539/1 543/1 542/2 542/1 546/2 546/3 546/1 544/1 544/8 544/12 544/13 544/14 544/15 544/16 544/17 544/2 544/18 544/19 544/3 544/20 544/21 544/22 544/23 544/24 544/25
Babelon "9 120 121 122
123 124 125 126 127 128
129 130 131 132
133 134 135 136 137 138 139-145 146 147 148 APPULEIA
1 2
3 4 5 APRONIA
1 2
3 4 AQUILLIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 ARRIA
1 2
3
841
Crawford 544/26 544/9 544/27 544/28 544/29 544/6 544/3° 544/31 544/32 544/1O 544/33 544/11 p. 552, no. 117* 544/34 544/35 544/7 544/36 544/37 544/38 544/39 p. 552, no. 117* 545/1 545/2 484/1 317/3 317/1 317/2 p. 551, no. 83* p. 551, no. 83* (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 303/1 401/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 513/1 513/2 513/3 18-2
Concordances Babelon ASINIA
1
2
3 ATIA
1
2
3
Crawford (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
Babelon AXIA
2
3 4 5 6
(non-Roman) 524/1 524/2 BAEBIA
ATILIA
1
2
3 4 5 6 (» P- 593) 6 bis 7 8 9 10
n 12
13 14 15 16 AUFIOIA
1 2
3 4
199/ia 199/ib 199/2 199/3 199/4 199/5 199/6 (non-Roman) 214/ic 214/ib 214/2 214/3 214/4 214/5 214/6 214/7 225/1 227/1 p. 550, no. 62* p. 557, no. 184* p. 548, no. 20*
1 2
AUTRONIA
1 2
3
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 BARBATIA
1
2
3 BETILIENA 1 CAECILIA
136/1 136/2 136/3 3 136/4 4 136/5 5 136/6 6 136/7 7 8 p. 562, no. 246* 65/1 9 10 (wrongly described) 11 65/3 12 65/4 65/5 13 65/6 14-15 16 229/1 p. 557, no. 185* 17 p. 557, no. 185* 18 221/1 19 20 282/1 21 3H/1
AURELIA
1
146/1 p. 549, no. 44* p. 556, no. 160* 842
Crawford 400/ia 400/ib (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 133/2 p. 556. no. 157* 133/3 133/1 133/1 133/4 133/5 133/6 133/7 133/8 133/9 236/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 5i7/ia 517/2 517/3 (Imperial)
132/2 132/1 132/3 3 132/4 4 5 132/5 6 132/6 132/7 7 8 174/1 174/2 9 10 174/3 11 174/4 12 175/5 does not exist 13 269/1 14 256/2b 15 16 256Mb 269/2 17 18 (wrongly described) 269/4 19 20 (does not exist) 21 256/1 22 256/2a 256/2a 23 24 256/2a 256/3 25 26 256/4a p. 550, no. 71* 27 1 2
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
35 36 37 38 39
284/ib
40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
p. 558, no. 202* 262/1 262/2 (for 39 var. cf. Bf. i, 59) 262/3 262/4 262/5 374/1 374/2 335/ib 335/ic 459/1 460/1 460/2 461/1 460/4 460/3
CAESIA
1
298/1
CALIDIA
1 2
284/ia p. 558, no. 202* 284/ib
3 CALPURNIA 1
2
3 4
5 6-12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23
24-29 30 31 32 33
Babelon
Crawford 263/ia 263/ia 369/1 263/2 263/3a 263/4 263/5a 284/ia
153/1 247/1 247/2 247/3 330/1 340/1 340/2d 34O/2C 34o/3a 340/3b p. 559, no. 214* 340/4 34o/5a 340/6C 34o/6a 418/1 418/2 408/1 446/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman)
36 37 38 39 40
Crawford (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
1 2
(non-Roman) (non-Roman)
1
(Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
34 35
CANIDIA
CANINIA
2
3 4 CARISIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 CASSIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8
843
464/2 464/4 464/5 464/3 464/3 464/6 464/8a 464/80 464/80 464/1 464/1 464/73 464/70 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 266/1 266/2 266/3 321/1 355/ic 386/1 428/3 428/2
Concordances Babelon 9 10 it 12
13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22
23 24
Crawford
428/1 413/1 p. 564, no. 287* 498/1 499/1 500/1 500/2 500/3 500/4 500/5 505/3 505/1 505/2
Babelon CLOULIA
2 CLOVIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
(Imperial)
(Imperial) (Imperial)
1
COCCEIA
1
2 CESTIA
1
2
3
491/ia 491/ib 491/2
3 COILIA
1 2
CIPIA
1
2
3 4 5 6 CLAUDIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 1O
n 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ?2
23 24 25 26 27
289/1 p. 550, no. 77* 289/2 289/3 289/4 289/5
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
300/1 299/ia 299/ib 373/ib 383/1 383/1 44i/i p. 559, no. 224* 445/1 445/2 439/1 512/1 512/2 494/22 494/23 494/2oa 494/21 494/16 494/17 494/5 494/18 does not exist 494/6a 494/19
10 11 12 CONSIDIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 COPONIA
1 2
3 CORDIA
1 2
3 4
(Imperial)
5
(Imperial)
6 7
(Imperial)
844
Crawford
260/1 332/1 180/1 180/2 180/3 180/4 180/5 173/1 173/2 173/3 173/4 173/5 476/1 517/4 517/5 517/6 154/1 318/ia 318/ib 437/ia 437/ib p. 559, no. 223* 437/2a 437/3a 437/2b 437/3b 437/4a 437/4b 424/1 465/23 465/ib 465/ia 465/5 465/3 465/4 465/7 465/6 465/83 465/8b 444/ia 444/ib 444/ic 463/ib 463/ia 463/3 463/2 463/4 463/5 463/5
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 8 9 CORNELIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
Crawford
Babelon
463/6 463/6 205/1 205/2 205/3 205/4 205/5 189/1 189/2 189/3 189/4 189/5 178/1 178/2 178/3 178/4 p. 556, no. 169* 178/5 310/1 288/1 296/1 296/1 296/2 296/3 296/4 311/1 329/ia-b 329/ic-d 329/2 359/1 359/2 359/2 p. 559, no. 220* 375/1 375/2 368/1 p. 566 p. 566 3o8/4b 367/4 367/5 367/4 and 5 367/2 367/3 367/2 and 3 376/1 354/3 381/ia 381/ib 434/1 434/2 345/1 345/2 345/3
53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 CORNUFICIA
Crawford
345/4 393/ia 393/ib (barbarous) 549/1 397/1 426/1 426/2 426/4a 426Mb 426/3 445/1 445/2 445/30 445/3a 441/1 439/1 500/6 500/7 500/4 500/5 500/2 500/3 500/1 p. 552, no. 112* 518/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
(Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
3 4
509/1 509/2 509/5 509/4
COSCONIA
1
282/2
COSSUTIA
1 2
3 4
395/1 480/19 480/16 480/15
CREPEREIA 1 2
399/1 a 399/ib
CREPUSIA
1 2
361/1 360/ia
3
360/ib
1 2
845
Concordances Babelon OUTONIA
Crawford
Babelon DURMIA
1 2
1
351/1
CUPIENNIA 1
218/1
3 4
CURIATIA
223/1 240/ia 240/2b 24O/3b 240/4b 240/6 240/28 240/33 240/48 240/5 p. 548, no. 21*
5 6
1
2
3 4
5 6 7 8
9 (ii p. 594) 9 bis 10
7 8
9 10 11 EGNATIA
BGNATULEIA
5 6 7
(plated hybrid) 285/2 285/3 285/4 285/5 285/6 285/7
DECIA
1
128/1
FABIA
DECIMIA
1
207/1
DIDIA
1 2
429/2 294/1
DOMITIA
1 2
147/1 147/2 261/2 261/3 261/4 147/4 285/1 (plated hybrid) 285/3 285/4 285/5 285/6 285/7
CURTIA
1
2
3 4
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23
261/1 282/1 282/2 282/3 282/4 282/5 519/1 519/2 521/1 521/2
BPPIA
1 2
Crawford (Imperial)
(Imperial)
(Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
3
39i/i 391/3 391/2
1
333/1
1
461/1
2
478/ia
3
p. 551, no. 99*
4
478/ib
1 2
17
273/1 p. 558, no. 199* (non-Roman) 273/2 265/1 371/1 p. 558, no. 196* 265/2 p. 558, no. 196* 265/3 268/1 283/ia 283/ib 322/ib 322/ia 322/2 366/2
FABRINIA
1 2 3 4
251/1 251/2 251/3 251/4
FANNIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
FARSULEUi
3
275/1 275/2 275/3
4
35i/i
1
392/ia 392/ib
2
846
Babelon-Crawford Babelon
Crawford
3
302/1 485/2 485/1
FLAVIA
1
504/1
FONTEIA
1 2
290/1 290/2 290/3 290/4 290/5 290/6 307/lb-d 307/la 353/ia 353/ic 353/id 353/2 p. 559, no. 219* 353/3 p. 559, no. 219* p. 559, no. 219* 429/1 429/2
FLAMINIA
1 2
Babelon 19 20 21 22
23 GALLIA
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
3 GARGILIA
A <
J
6 *j
1
g Q
10 11 12 GELLIA
FULVIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8
284/ib 284/ia p. 558, no. 202* HERENNIA
3 FUNDANIA
1 2
FUR1A 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
n 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
326/1 326/2 144/1 144/2 144/3 144/4 144/5 144/6 155/1 187/2 155/3 does not exist 155/4 p. 555, no. 136* 187/1 p. 549, no. 47* p. 549, no. 47* p. 549, no. 47* 151/1 281/1
1 2
(non-Roman) (non-Roman)
403/1 1
1 2
3
20 FUFIA
1 2
1 2
3 4
Crawford 356/ia 356/ib (non-Roman) (non-Roman) 414/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 35OA/ia 35OA/1D 350A/1C 35OA/id 35OA/ie does not exist 35OA/3a 35OA/3D 350A/3C 35OA/3d 35OA/3e 35OA/3f 232/1 232/1
232/2 232/3 232/3 232/4 517/7 517/8 308/1 308/2 308/3
1 2
466/1 466/1
3
(non-Roman)
HORATIA
1
127/1
HOSIDIA
1 2
407/2 407/1
1
3 4 5
315/1 448/2 p. 564, no. 290* 448/3 448/1
1
209/1
HIRTIA
HOSTILIA
2
ITIA
847
Concordances Babelon rULIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10
n
12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
33 34 35 36 36 var.
37 38 39 40 41 42 43
44 45 46 47 48 49 5O 51 52 53
54
Crawford
Babelon
224/1 258/1 323/1 320/1 352/ia and c 352/ib 352/2 355/ic 443/1 458/1 468/1 468/2 482/1 457/1 456/1 467/1 476/1 475/ia 475/lb 475/2 p. 551, no. 99* 466/1 466/1 p. 551, no. 98* 452/1 452/2 452/5 452/4 452/3 481/1 480/23 480/3 480/17 480/4 480/8 480/70 480/73 480/6 480/1 480/24 480/26 480/16 480/15 480/19 485/2 485/1 480/50 480/18 480/10 480/11 480/13 480/20 480/21 p. 551, no. 103* 488/1
55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102
103 104 105 106 107 108 109
848
Crawford
488/2 494/16 494/24 494/39a 529/3 529/2a 529/20 529/1 490/1 490/2 490/3 497/1 497/3 529/4b does not exist 495/1 495/2 528/ib 528/2b 528/2a 492/1 528/3 493/1 494/18 does not exist 494/6a 494/19 494/25 494/3a 494/15 494/9b 494/33 (plated hybrid) 494/12 497/2 p. 552, no. 112* 518/1 523/ia 523/ib 517/6 5i7/ia 517/2 518/2 535/1 535/1 p. 566, no. 310* 535/2 p. 566, no. 310* (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
Babelon-Crawford Babelon
no 111 112
113 114
"5 116 117 118
119 120 121 122
123 124 125 126 127 128 129 13O 131
132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142
143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152
153 154 155 156 »57 158 159 160 161 162
163 164
Babelon
Crawford (Impenal) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 526/4 526/2 526/1 526/3 525/4 525/3 525/1 525/2 534/2 534/1 534/3 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 537/1 537/2 538/2 540/1 540/2 538/1 546/4 546/6 546/7 546/8 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
165
166-354 JONIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5O 51
849
Crawford does not exist (Imperial) 210/1 210/2 210/3 210/4 210/5 210/6 210/7 220/1 285/2 285/3 285/4 285/5 285/6 285/7 337/3 337/3 var. 337/2f 337/2C 337/ia 337/ib 337/4 P. 559, no. 212* 337/5 P. 559> no. 212* 450/2 450/1 45i/i 450/3 p. 551, no. 95* 433/2 433/1 433/1 506/3 501/1 503/1 502/1 502/2 502/3 502/4 500/6 500/7 506/2 506/1 507/2 507/ia 507/ib 505/4 5O5/5 504/1 508/1 508/2
Concordances Babelon
53 JUVENTIA
1
2
3 4
5 6 7
Crawford 508/3 542/1
Babelon 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
161/1 161/2 161/3 161/4 161/5 161/6 202/1 LOLLIA
LICINIA
1
2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 *4 15
16 17 18
19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 LIVINEIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
186/1 186/2 186/3 186/4 186/5 P. 557. no. 171* 292/1 292/2 292/3 292/48 282/1 282/2 282/3 282/4 282/5 354/1 354/2 430/1 460/1 460/2 460/4 460/3 454/2 454/1 454/3 454/4 454/5 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 494/24 494/2a 494/2b 494/25 494/3* 494/30 494/1 494/31 494/26a 494/27
LUCILIA LUCRETIA
3 4
473/2 473/1 473/3 473/4
1
324/1
1
237/1 390/1 390/2
1 2
2
3 LURIA
1 2
3 4 LUTATIA
1 2
3 4
5 MAEC1LIA
1
2
3 4 5 6 MAENIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MAIANIA
1 2
3 4 5
850
Crawford 494/28 494/30 494/29 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
(Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 125/1 305/1 p. 558, no. 206* p. 551, no. 79* 305/2 92/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 138/1 143/1 143/2 143/3 143/4 143/5 249/1 249/2 249/3 249/4 203/1 203/2 203/3 203/4 203/5
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 6 7 MALLIA
MAMILIA
1 2
299/ia 299/ib
1 2
149/ia i49/2b 149/38 i49/4a i49/5» 362/1 360/ia 360/ia 36oyib
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MANLIA
1 2
3 4
5
6 7 8 9
10
n 12 MARCIA
Crawford 203/6 (Imperial)
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1O
n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22
23 24
25 26
309/1 295/1 367/4 367/5 367/4-5 367/2 367/3 367/2-3 381/ia 381/ib 411/ia 411/ib 215/1 215/28 215/3 215/4 215/5 215/6 215/7 245/1 245/2 245/3 259/1 293/1 293/2 293/3 p. 558, no. 205* 283/ia 283/ib 346/1 346/2 346/3 346/4 346/4 346/5 363/1 360/ia 360/ia
Babelon 27 28 29 30
31 32 MARIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13
14 15 16 17 MATIBNA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MEMMIA
1 2
3 4 5 8 9 10 MESCINIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 MBTTIA
1 2
3 4 5
851
Crawford 360/ib 425/1 425/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 148/1 148/2 148/3 148/4 148/5 148/6 378/ia 378/ib 378/ic (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 162/2 162/2 162/1 162/3 162/4 162/53 i62/6b 162/78 p. 547, no. 2* 304/1 313/1 313/2 313/3 313/4 349/1 427/2 427/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 480/23 480/28 48o/2a 480/3 480/17
Concordances Babelon MINATIA
1-5
Babelon
Crawford
470/1
13
Crawford (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
1 2
483/2 483/2
9 10 11 12
6
277/1 277/2 242/1 242/2 242/3 242/4
7
does not exist
8 9
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
242/5 243/1 243/1 var. p. 558, no. 191* 243/2 243/3 243/4 248/1 248/2 248/3 248/4 319/1
MUCIA
1
403/1
MUNATIA
1 2
475/ib 475/ia 475/2 522/4 522/1 522/2
NUMITORIA 1 2
494/44* 494/44D 494/45 494/40 494/41 494/423-0 494/438 494/39 494/13 494/70 494/14 494/8a 494/8b 494/15 494/90
NUMONIA
MINUCIA
1
2
3 4
5
10
11 12
3 4
5 6 MUSSIDIA
1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 NAEVIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7
8
179/1 179/2 179/3 179/4 179/5 382/1
NASHUA
3
(barbarous)
4
483/1
NERIA
1 2
441/1 445/2
NONIA
1 2
421/1
3 NORBANA
1 2
3 4 5
3 4
5 6 1 2
3 OGULNIA
1 2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
(Imperial) (Imperial)
357/1 357/2 491/ia 491/ib 491/2 246/1 246/2 246/3 246/43 246/40 246/5 514/1 514/2 p. 581 n. 7 350A/IC 35OA/id 35OA/ie does not exist 35OA/ia 35OA/ib 35OA/3d 350A/3C 35OA/3a 35©A/3b 35OA/3e 35OA/3f
(Imperial)
6
188/1 188/2 188/3 188/4 188/5 does not exist
(Imperial)
7
190/1
OPIMIA
1 2
3 4 5
852
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 8 9
13
190/2 190/3 190/4 190/6 253/1 253/2
15
253/3 p. 558, no. 193*
16
254/1
10 11 12
Babelon
Crawford
9 10 11 12
13 14 15
13
p. 547. no. 5* 396/1 409/2 409/1 405/5 405/3 405/4 (plated hybrid) 405/1 405/2 508/1 508/2 508/3
PLAETORIA 1 2
OPPIA
l 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 PAPIA
l 2
3 4 5 6 7 PAPIRIA
l 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PEDANIA
l
450/2 450/3 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman)
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
384/1 472/1 472/2
472/3
PLANCIA
1
432/1
472/40 472/4C
PLAUTIA
1
20 21 22
134/ia 134/ib 134/2 134/3 134/4 134/5 134/6 422/ib 422/ lb 422/ia 420/1 420/2 431/1 453/1 453/1 (non-Roman) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
PLUTIA
1
278/1
POBLICIA
1 2
282/3 335/ib 335/ic 335/2 (barbarous) 335/3d
472/4a
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
i93/i 193/2
193/3 193/4 193/5 276/1 279/1 p. 548, no. 21* 279/2
2
506/2 506/1
1 2
487/1 487/2a
3 4
487/2D 487/2C
PETRONIA
1-21
(Imperial)
PINARIA
1 2
208/1 200/1 200/2 200/3 200/4 200/5 200/6 does not exist
1C 11 12
13 14 15 16
PETILLIA
3 4 5 6 7 8
Crawford 546/2 546/3 546/1 546/6 546/7 546/8 does not exist
17 18 19
3 4 5 6
853
Concordances Babelon 7 8 9 1O POMPEIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10-14
15 16-18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O
31
Crawford 335/3g 335/3f 380/1 469/1 235/1 235/2 235/3 434/1 434/2 402/1 447/ia 446/1 469/1 470/1 471/1 477/1 478/ia 479/1 511/2
Babelon PORCIA
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 POSTUMIA 1 2
1 2
379/1 379/2
PROCULEIA 1 POMPONIA 1
2
3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22
23
334/2 334/3 334/4 334/5 334/6 334/1 282/4 410/1 410/2 410/2 410/3 410/6 410/5 410/4 410/10 410/10 410/7 410/7 410/9I5-C 410/9D-C 4io/9a 410/8 398/1
2 QUINCTIA
274/1 274/3 270/1 301/1 343/ia-b 343/ic 343/2 282/5 462/ic 462/ia-b 462/2
10 11 12 13 14
9
PROCH.IA
Crawford
252/1 335/ib 335/lc 335/9 335/ioa 335/iob 372/1 372/2 394/1 450/2 450/1 45i/i 450/3a 450/30
3 4 5 6 7 8
5n/4a 5ii/4d 5«/i 511/30 511/3C 511/38 483/2 483/2 483/1 P- 552, no. 109*
1 2
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
(non-Roman) (non-Roman) 548/1 267/1 267/2 267/3 267/4 297/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
QUINCTILIA1
152/ia-b
RBNIA
231/1 231/2 231/3
1 2
3
854
Babelon-Crawfard Babdon 1 2
Crawford
3
283/1 283/2 412/1
RUBELLIA
l
(Imperial)
RUBRIA
l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
348/1 348/2 348/3 348/4 348/5 348/6 p. 559> no. 217* 348/7 p. 559» no. 217*
l 2 3
389/1 (Imperial) (Imperial)
RUTItIA
l
387/1
SALVIA
l
523/ia 523/ib (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
ROSCIA
RUSTIA
2
3 4 5 6
3 4 5 6
(Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
SATRIENA
1
388/1
SAUFEIA
l
204/1 204/2 204/3 204/4 204/5
SANQUINIA 1
2
2 3 4 5 SCRIBONIA l 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Babelon
Crawford
20 21
169/1 216/1 2i6/2a 216/20 216/3 216/43 216/40 216/5 216/6 525/4 525/3 525/1 525/2 530/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (Imperial) (Imperial)
SENTIA
1 2
325/1 p. 551, no. 85*
SEPUIXIA
1
13
480/5D 480/18 480/10 480/11 480/13 480/20 480/21 480/22 480/25 does not exist 480/27 480/27 p. 548, no. 21*
SERGIA
1
286/1
SERVILIA
1 2
239/1 239/2 239/3 239/4 264/1 264/1 370/1 264/2 264/3 264/4D 264/42 330/1 327/1 328/1
SEMPRONIA 1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13
14 15 16 17
18 19
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
201/1 201/2 201/3 201/4 201/5 201/6 201/7 416/1 417/1
10 11 12
13 14
855
Concordances Babelon 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 SESTIA
1 2
3 4 SICINIA
1 2
3 4 5 SILIA
1 2
3 SOSIA
Crawford 423/1 p. 551, no. 95* 433/2 433/1 433/1 506/3 501/1 503/1 502/1 502/2 502/3 502/4 500/6 500/7 506/2 506/1 504/1 508/1 508/2 508/3 507/2 507/ia 507/ib 505/4 505/5 5O5/3 5O5/1 505/2
STATIUA
444/ia 444/lb (plated hybrid) 444/ic 440/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
3 4
SULPICIA
1 2
230/1 does not exist
STATIA
1 2
510/1 (non-Roman)
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13
Crawford (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 312/1 312/2 312/3 312/4 p. 558, no. 207* 406/1 406/1 438/1 515/1 515/2 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
TARQUITIA 1
366/4
TERENTIA
15 16 17 18
126/1 74/i 74/2 185/1 185/2 185/3 257/4 185/5 185/6 217/1 217/2 217/3 217/4 217/5 447/1 (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman)
THORIA
1
316/1
TITIA
1 2
341/1 341/2 341/3 341/4 341/5 341/6 341/7
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14
3 4 5 6 7 TITINIA
SPURILIA
1 2
3
502/1 502/2 502/3 502/4
(non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman) (non-Roman)
1 2
Babelon
1 2
3 4 5 6
856
150/1 150/2 150/3 150/4 150/5 150/6
Babelon-Crawford Babelon 7 8 9
Babelon
Crawford 226/1 226/2
30
p. 557, no. 183*
32
31
33 TITURIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7
344/ia 344/1 b 344/ic 344/2b 344/2C
3
344/3 344/4
4 5
257/4 257/5
1
53i/i
3 4 5 TULLIA
1
280/1
TURILLIA
1 2
344/5b 344/5C cf. 187/7 p. 559, no. 215* 545/1
1 2
3 4 5 VALERIA
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28
29
1 2
257/1 257/2 257/3
241/1 241/2 241/3 241/4 241/5
TREBANIA
VARGUNTEIA
Crawford (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
191/1 191/2 191/3 191/4 191/5 191/6 228/2 228/1 228/3 228/4 306/1 365/1
VENTIDIA
1
35OA/ie
2
does not exist
3 4 5 6 7 8
12
35OA/ia 35OA/ib 350A/IC 35OA/id 35OA/3e 35OA/3f 35OA/3a 35OA/3b 35OA/3d 35OA/3C
VETTIA
1 2
331/1 404/1
VETURIA
1 2
234/1 234/2
VIBIA
Not
95/i
VERGILIA
9 10 11
numbered 1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
435/1 474/3a 474/3° 474/1 b 474/ia 474/2 474/2 474/5 474/4 474/6 474/7 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
10-12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
857
342/5b 342/5b 342/4b 342/4a 342/6a 342/3b 342/3a 342/1 342/2
342/7 342/8 342/93 342/9D 449/2
449/3 449/ia 449/ib 449/4
449/5 45i/i
Concordances Babelon
VINICIA
494/37 494/36 494/35 494/38 494/34 494/10 494/32 494/11 494/33 (plated hybrid) 494/12
1
436/1 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial)
2
3 4 5 VIPSANIA
Crawford
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
1
2
Babelon 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 VOCONIA
1
2
3 4 VOLTEIA
1
2
3 4
5
534/2 534/1
6
858
Crawford 534/3 (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) (Imperial) 526/4 526/2 526/1 526/3 385/1 385/2 385/3 385/4 385/5 377/1
INDICES I. INDEX OF TYPES (a) Substantive types This index is to the catalogue only and the numbers given are those of the catalogue; the order of the entries is sometimes logical rather than strictly alphabetical; an asterisk indicates that the type in question is an attribute or adjunct. I have taken advantage of the opportunity offered by this index to give a certain amount of bibliographical information not easily presentable elsewhere. This index should be used in conjunction with the index of persons. Accensus, 433; see also Attendant Acisculus, 474 Acisculus*, 474 Acorn, 14, 21 Acorn*, 26 Aegis, 285, 463 Aegis*, 328, 348, 465, 494 Aemilia, Vestal, 494 PAemilia, head r., 419 M. Aemilius Lepidus, Cos. 187, 419 M. Aemilius Lepidus, head 1., 494 M. Aemilius Lepidus, head r., 492, 494, 495 L. Aemilius Paullus, 415 Aeneas carrying Anchises, 458, 494 Africa (see F. Salviat, RAN, 1972,21), bust r., 491, 509 Africa, head r., 402, 461; see also Genius terrae Africae Alexandria, head r., 419 Altar, 334, 372, 445. 455. 478, 494 Altar*, 540 Altar with snake coiled round top, 348 Altar with snake coiled round top*, 348 Amphitrite, bust seen from behind, 399 Anchises, 458, 494 Anchor, 10, 340, 506 Anchor*, 50, 86B, 194, 258, 290; see also Trophy, naval Ancile*, 452 Ancus Marcius, head r., 346, 425 Anguipede figure, 405; see also Giant Ankh*, 460 C. Antius Restio, head r., 455 L. Antonius, head r., 517 M. Antonius as Augur, 533 M. Antonius as soldier, 533 M. Antonius, head r. (for his beard see
Plutarch, Ant. 18 - wrongly from 43 B.C. only), 480, 488, 492, 493, 494, 496, 516, 517, 520, 521, 527, 528, 529, 531, 533, 536, 539, 541. 542, 543, 545 M. Antonius junior, head r., 541 Anvil*, 416 Apex (see K. E. Esdaile, JRS 1911, 212), 443, 489, 532 Apex*, 52, 59, 252, 267, 268, 306, 480, 494, 502 Aplustre, 505; see also Trophy, naval Aplustre*, 426, 505, 511 Apollo in biga r., 254 Apollo in quadriga r., 236 Apollo, bust 1., wearing diadem, 408 Apollo, bust r., 504 Apollo, bust r., wearing diadem, 408 Apollo, bust seen from behind, with thunderbolt in r. hand, 298, 354 Apollo, head r., 445 Apollo, head 1., hair tied with band, 18,19, 26 Apollo, head r., hair tied with band, 18, 26, 346, 369, 444 Apollo, head 1., wearing diadem, 408 Apollo, head r., wearing diadem, 285, 408, 410, 474 Apollo, laureate head 1., 15, 408 Apollo, laureate head r., 1, 26, 97 (on quincunx), 99 (on quincunx), 333,334, 335,340, 341, 342, 344, 353, 361, 363, 369, 370, 371, 373, 385, 408, 410, 454, 465, 494, 503, 506 Apollo, head r., wearing oak-wreath, 350A ?Apollo, head r., wearing oak-wreath, 304; see also Male head Aqueduct, 291, 425 Aquila, see Eagle Aretas kneeling, 422 Argus*, see Dog
859
Indices Armenian tiara, 539 Armenian tiara*, 543 Arrow, see Bow Arrow*, 434, 444 Artemis of Ephesus, 445 Artemis of Massalia, 448 ?Artemis, bust r., 508; see also Diana Aspergillum (standard numismatic term, not actually attested, but a falsa lectio at CGL ii, 404, 22, see TLL, s.v.; R. von Schaeven, Romische Opfergerate, 45-6), 372, 443, 467, 489, 492, 532, 537, 538 Ass*, 195 Ass's head*, 220 Attendant of magistrate, 292, 301 Axe {see A. B. Cook, Zeus ii, 631-5), 406, 443, 456, 466, 480, 484, 489, 500, 508, 532 Axe*, 452, 502 Bacchius Iudaeus, 431 Ballot*, 292; see also Tablet Barley-grain, 18 Barley-grain*, 414 Barley-grains, two, 14, 25 Basilica Aemilia, 419 Battle between two gladiators, 294 Battle on horseback, 264, 370 Battle between horseman and warrior on foot, 429 Battle between Roman soldier and barbarian soldier, 319 Battle between two soldiers, 327 Battle between man and lion*, 261 Bellerophon on Pegasus, 395 PBellona, helmeted bust r., 385 Bench, see Sella, Subsellium Bird*, 141, 292, 322 Bird and rudder*, 117B Boar 1., 18, 26 Boar r., 18, 26 Boar, Calydonian, 407 Boar, Erymanthian, 385 Boar's-head helmet*, 281 Boar-standard*, 437 Bocchus, 426 Bonus Eventus, head r., 416 Bow*, 27, 444 Bow and arrow with club, 285 Bow and arrow*, 236, 254, 539 Bow and quiver*, 380, 391, 432, 494; see also Diana Bow-case and quiver*, 524 Boxer r., 396 Boy, half-length figure facing, 405 Boy, winged, on dolphin r., 390 Branch, 3
Branch*, 76,236,256,257,262,276,288,367, 494> 53i; see also Laurel-branch, Palmbranch Branches, two*, 229 Bucranium*, 296, 372 Bull 1., 5, 24 Bull r., 5, 37, 474 Bull charging r., 39, 42, 69, 72, 494 Bull galloping 1., 377 Bull*, 116, 142, 372 Bull, man-headed r., 2 Bull, man-headed, forepart r., 1 IButeo, 322 Butterfly*, 184 Butterfly and vine-branch*, 184 Caduceus (symbol of Mercury, q.v., also symbol of Felicitas, RE vi, 2165-6, or signum pacts, Aulus Gellius x, 27, 3, compare Servius on Vergil, Aen. iv, 242; viii, 138), 14, 25, 285, 357, 480, 522, 529 Caduceus tied with fillet, 11 Caduceus, winged, 405, 440 Caduceus between two cornuacopiae on globe, 520 Caduceus*, 37, 60, 108, 296, 335, 348, 366, 367, 403, 449, 450, 460, 470, 472, 485, 494 Caestus*, 396 Calf 1., 526 Calydonian boar, see Boar Camel r., 422, 431 Capis = Simpuhtm, see Varro, LL v, 21; Livy x, 7, 10; Arruntius in Priscian, GLK ii, 251 Capitoline temple, 385, 487 Capitoline triad, see Jupiter Capricorn*, 550 Captive, 232, 326, 332, 427, 429, 438, 452, 468, 503 Carnyx*, 128, 281, 326, 332, 333, 337, 437, 448, 450, 452, 468, 482 Catanaean brothers, 511 Catanaean brothers, one of, 308 Causia*, 432, 484 Centaur fighting Hercules, 39 Centaurs, biga of, 229 Ceres walking r., torch in each hand, 341, 342, 449 Ceres seated r., holding torch in 1. hand, cornears in r. hand, 427 Ceres in biga of snakes r., 385, 449 Ceres, bust 1., 321 Ceres, bust r., 351, 378 Ceres, head r., 82, 97 (on quincunx), 99 (on quincunx), 414, 427, 467, 494 Chariot*, 482
860
Types Chickens, two, apparently feeding, 12 Cista, for voting, 292; see also Voting-urn Claudia, Vestal, 512 M. Claudius Marcellus carrying trophy into temple, 439 M. Claudius Marcellus, head r., 439 Clementia, temple of, 480 Cleopatra, bust r., 543 Club, 253, 518; see also Bow and arrow Club on which hangs lion's-skin, 444 Club*, 27, 39, 82, 89,106, 229, 255, 348, 380, 410, 455, 461; also frequent adjunct of Head of Hercules Cock*, 293 C. Coelius Caldus, head r., 437 Column, see Victory on column Columna Minucia, 242, 243 Concordia, head r., 415, 417. 429. 436, 494. Corn-ear, 6, 357 Corn-ear*, 13, 40, 42, 68, 69, 72, 245, 252, 253, 260, 261, 264, 296, 306, 323, 330, 351, 404, 414. 426, 427, 445, 460, 461, 473, 494 Corn-ear and crooked staff*, 77 L. Cornelius Sulla, dream of, 480 L. Cornelius Sulla receiving surrender of Jugurtha, 426 L. Cornelius Sulla, head r., 434 Cornucopiae, 308, 376, 494 Cornucopiae on globe, 464, 494 Cornucopiae superimposed on thunderbolt, 265, 371 Cornucopiae, double, 308, 375, 474 Cornucopiae, double, on globe, 465 Cornucopiae*, 58, 157, 218, 296, 329, 397, 403, 405, 409, 460, 480, 494, 516, 525 Cornuacopiae, two, 3, 520 Q. Cornuficius standing 1., 509 Crab, 505 Crescent, 39 Crescent*, 57, 137, 204, 212, 222, 292, 296, 309, 310, 335, 346, 426, 470, 480, 494, 550 Crescent and five stars, 494 Crescent and seven stars, 390 Crook*, 410 Crow*, 509 Cuirass*, 430, 494, 533 Culullus, 406, 443, 456, 467, 484. 500, 508 Culullus*, 452, 480, 512 Cupid walking r., holding palm-branch in 1. hand, wreath in r. hand, 463 Cupid flying with wreath, 313, 349 Cupid placing wreath on prow-stem, 313 Cupid crowning Venus, 258 Cupid flying above shoulder of Venus, 391, 494
Cupid on shoulder of Venus, 391, 463, 468 Cupid on dolphin, 463 Cupid on goat, 353 Cupid breaking thunderbolt over knee, 352 Cupid, bust r., 391, 465 Cupid holding palm-branch*, 359 Cupids, biga of, 320 Curule chair, 356, 397, 409, 414, 428, 434, 435, 460, 465, 473. 491. 494, 497 (on 491 and 497, front legs decorated with sculptured eagles, note Suetonius, Galba 18 for a curule chair placed the wrong way round) Cybele in biga of lions, 385, 491 Cybele, bust r., 322 Cybele, head r., 356, 409, 431 Cypress grove*, 486 Dagger*, 296; see also Knife, Sword Daggers, two, 508 Dancer, female*, 292 Decempeda, 525 Decempeda*, 78 Dei Penates, jugate heads r., 312,455; see also Dioscuri, cf. p. 369 Desultor, 297, 346, 480 Diadem (see H. W. Ritter, Diadem und Konigherrschaft, Munich and Berlin, 1965), 39, 223, 240, 291, 293, 308, 336, 346, 348, 357. 359. 360, 366, 374, 375, 376, 382, 391, 392, 396, 403, 413, 415, 417, 419, 424. 425. 426, 429, 430, 440, 446, 447, 448, 452, 455. 457. 458, 463, 465, 468, 473, 480, 481, 485,498, 499. 500, 505, 506, 511, 513, 529, 543, 550 Diadem tied with fillet*, 507 Diadem, laureate*, 494 Diadem, turreted*, 419 Diadem, winged*, 341, 405, 418, 449 Diana standing facing, 494 Diana in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, lituus in r. hand, 426 Diana in biga of stags r., 222, 336, 400 Diana, bust r., wearing diadem, 426 Diana, bust r., bow and quiver over shoulder, 160, 308, 315, 335, 372, 383, 394, 407. 464 Diana, head r., wearing diadem, bow and quiver over shoulder, 455 Diana Nemorensis, statue, 486 Diana Nemorensis, bust r., 486 Dies, two, 464 Dioscuri galloping r., standard reverse type of denarius from 44 to 133/2, quinarius from 14 to 103, sestertius from 44 to 98B, also 97 (on quincunx), 98A (on sextans), 99 (on quincunx), thereafter 134,135,137,138,
86l
Indices Dioscuri (cont.) 139,146,147.152,153. »54,155,157,162. 164,165,167,168, 169,170,171,172,182, 198, 201, 209, 210, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 224, 233, 237, 267, 277, 278 Dioscuri riding apart, 239 Dioscuri standing facing, each holding spear, 515 Dioscuri standing facing, between horses, each holding spear, 304 Dioscuri watering horses at fountain of Juturna, 335; see also Horses Dioscuri, jugate heads r., 98 A, 307, 463, 515 Dioscuri, Janiform head, hair tied with band, 14, 25 Dioscuri, laureate Janiform head, 28, 29, 30, 31. 32, 33, 34, 42, 290 Dioscuri, caps of*, see Pilei Dioscuri, one of, r., 98A Dioscuri, one of, head 1., 18, 19, 26 Dioscuri, one of, head r., 18, 26 Dish*, 418, 419 Dog 1., 24 Dog r., 24, 26; see also Hound Dog*, 122, 293, 298, 362; see also Puppy Dolabella*, 73, 81 Doliolum*, 307 Dolphin 1., 14 Dolphin r., 14, 25, 390, 447, 463 Dolphin*, 80, 160, 206, 247, 296, 483 Dolphins, two*, 12 Dot*, 296 Dragon, 443 Dragon's head*, 460 Eagle, 447, 463, 472 Eagle on sceptre, 398 Eagle on thunderbolt, 4, 23, 44, so, 72, 88, 105, 106, 314, 409, 428, 487, 549 Eagle r., holding flower in beak, 39 Eagle, legionary, 365, 372,441,497, 511, 525, 544, 546 Eagle*, 296, 445, 491, 494, 497 Eagle on thunderbolt*, 348 Eagle's head*, 460 Ear*, 170 Elephant, 9, 374, 459 Elephant trampling dragon, 443 Elephants, biga of, 269 Elephant's head*, 262, 263, 269, 369 Elephant's skin*, 402, 461, 491, 509 Epulum, 437 Erymanthian boar, see Boar Eryx, 424 Europa on bull galloping 1., 377 Europa on bull r., 474
Q. Fabius Pictor, 268 Fasces, 357, 372, 414, 480 Fasces*, 403, 494 Faustulus, shepherd, 235 Feather*, 130, 163 Felicitas, head r., 473 Female figure giving palm-branch to soldier, 469 Female figure, leading horse 1., 430 Female figure, seated 1., holding culullus in r. hand, 512 Female figure, kneeling, 510 Female figure*, see Dancer, female* Female bust 1., wearing winged diadem, 405 Female bust r., 343, 462 Female bust r., wearing causia, 484 Female bust r., laureate and wearing diadem, 291 Female bust r., wearing diadem, 366 Female bust r., wearing turreted diadem, 39 Female head 1., 14, 16, 19, 25 Female head r., 16 Female head r., laureate, 316 Female head r., with long hair, 448 Female head r., wearing causia, 432 Female head r., wearing diadem, 39, 336, 366 Female head r., wearing diadem, sometimes laureate, 419 Female head r., wearing oak-wreath, 448 Female head r., wearing veil, 452, 466 Female head r., laureate and wearing veil, 419 Female head*, 127 Female head, wearing turreted crown*, 460 Female head, decorating prow-stem*, 205 Ficus Ruminalis, 235 Fides, head r., 454 Fillet*, 11, 507, 544, 545, 546 Flora, head r., 423, 512 Flower*, 39, 293, 410, 425, 512 Flutes, two*, 410 Fly*, 159 Foedus, see Oath-taking scene Foot, deformed*, 356 Fortuna, 480, 494 (/32 and probably 14), 516, 525 ?Fortuna, bust r., 405 Fortuna populi Romani, bust r., 513 Fortuna populi Romani, head r., 440 Gallic warrior, 448; see also Warrior ?Genius populi Romani, standing crowning Roma, 329 PGenius populi Romani, seated facing, 397 Genius populi Romani, bust r., 393 Genius populi Romani, head r., 428 Genius terrae Africae, 460; see also Africa
862
Types Giant, anguipede, 310,474; see also Anguipede figure Girl and snake, 412, 472, 480 Gladiators, two, 294 Globe, 393, 426, 464. 465. 480, 520 Globe*, 397. 4<>3, 409. 449. 480, 494, 546 Globe on tripod*, 410 Goat, 288, 353, 432 Goats, biga of, 231 Goat*, 231, 334 Goddess standing 1., holding caduceus in 1. hand, sceptre in r. hand, 485 Goddess in biga r., holding sceptre and reins in 1. hand, branch in r. hand, 262 Goddess in biga r., holding whip in 1. hand and reins in r. hand, 247 Gorgoneion*, 476, 494; see also Medusa, head facing* Grasshopper*, 335 Gryphon, 384 Gryphon*, 17, 23, 25,182 Hammer*, 59, 335. 416, 417, 464 Hand, 1., 21, 27 Hand, r., 14, 21, 25, 27, 546 Hands, clasped, 480, 494 Hands, two, clasped round caduceus, 450, 451. 494, 529 Harbour, see Ostia Hare's head*, 182 Harpa, 285 Harpa*, 293, 313, 317, 330, 349, 421, 441, 445 Hasta pura, 513 Helmet, Attic*, 35, 38, 41, 42, 43; and see entry for Roma and p. 721 Helmet, Attic, decorated with sea-horse*, 2 Helmet, Corinthian*, 13, 14, 17, 21, 25, 27; standard helmet of Mars as obverse type of Mars/Eagle gold, 44, 50, 72, 88, 105, 106; standard helmet of Minerva as obverse type of triens from 35 to 350B; standard helmet of Minerva as obverse type of dupondius on 41, 56, 69; also 98A (on half-victoriatus), 287, 296, 328, 345, 348, 455,463, 474, 491, 494 Helmet, Corinthian, helmet of Roma*, 281, 287, 305, 309, 381, 435, 449, 469 Helmet, Corinthian, decorated with gryphon*, 17.23 Helmet, Corinthian, decorated with seahorse*, 17 Helmet, Phrygian*, 19, 21,22, 24,26, 27,41, 97, 98A, 102, 269, 282, 288, 380, 464; see also 128
Helmet, triple-crested*, 37, 329 Helmet*, 118,168, 429,464 Helmet with goat's horns*, 259, 293 Helmet, boar's-head*, see Boar's-head helmet* Hercules standing facing, 461, 494 Hercules seated facing, 494 Hercules fighting centaur, 39 Hercules fighting stag, 82 Hercules strangling Nemean lion, 380 Hercules walking r., holding trophy in 1. hand, club in r. hand, 455 Hercules in biga of centaurs r., holding reins in 1. hand, club in r. hand, 229 Hercules in quadriga r., holding reins and trophy in 1. hand, club in r. hand, 255 Hercules, bust seen from behind, club over shoulder, 296, 297, 329 Hercules, bust r., 426 Hercules, head 1., 35, 36, 38, 40, 42 Hercules, head r., 20, 27, 39, 40, 41, 42 (on 39 and 42 wearing boar's-skin); standard obverse type of quadrans from 56 to 350B (except for 97/5C and 13d, 98A, 340, 341, 342,344; on 69 and 72 wearing boar's-skin); also 289 (on uncia), 385, 532 Hercules, bearded head r., 397 Hercules, head r., wearing laureate diadem, 494 Hercules Musarum, 410 Hercules and Mercury, Janiform heads, 348 Hispania, head r., 372 Honos, head r., 403, 473 Horse galloping 1., 24, 26 Horse galloping r., 15, 27, 28, 340 Horse galloping r., wearing bridle, 346 Horse, see also Parthian horse Horse*, 292 Horses, two, 327 Horses, two, galloping r., 98A Horse, head L, 17, 18 Horse, head r., 13, 17, 18, 25 Horseman 1., 98A, 295, 340, 408 Horseman 1., holding sword and severed head in 1. hand, 286 Horseman r., 39, 340, 408, 454 Horseman r., holding reins in 1. hand, spear in r. hand, 259 Horseman r., brandishing spear, 361 Horseman r., carrying trophy, 419 Horseman r., dragging warrior, 454 Horseman, see also Statue, equestrian, Battle Horsemen, three, charging 1., 335 Hound, running r., 394, 464, see also Dog Hound*, 407 Hounds, three*, 400
863
Indices Isis, bust r., 409 Italia clasping hands with Roma, 403 C. Iulius Caesar, head r., 480, 485, 488, 490, 494. 525. 526, 534, 535 C. Iulius Caesar Octavianus, see Octavian L. Iunius Brutus, Cos. 509, walking r., 433 L. Iunius Brutus, Cos. 509, head r., 433, 506 M. Iunius Brutus, Liberator, head r., 506,507, 508 Ivy-leaf*, 377 Ivy-wreath as border, 288 Ivy-wreath*, 266, 341, 343, 385, 386, 411, 449, 462, 494 Jackdaw*, 238 Janus, bearded laureate head, standard obverse type of as from 35 onwards (except for 346, 348); also 281, 547 (on dupondius) Jug (for Augurs and sacrifice see G. Wissowa, RE ii, 2330; J. Marquardt, Staatsverw. iii, 408), 466, 467, 475, 489, 522, 537, 538 Jug*, 235, 402, 426, 428, 460, 488, 511, 517 Jug and limits, 374, 456, 500; see also Lituus and jug Jug and lituus*, 359 Jug and torch, 405 Jugurtha, 426 Junostandingr.,holdingsceptre in r. hand,296 Juno in biga of goats r., holding sceptre and reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 231 Juno in quadriga r., holding sceptre in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 223, 240 Juno, head r., wearing diadem and veil, sceptre over shoulder, 348 Juno Moneta, bust r., 396 Juno Moneta, head r., 464 ?Juno Regina in biga r., 262 Juno Sospita, with crow on shoulder, 509 Juno Sospita, standing r., 379 Juno Sospita in biga r., 379, 480 Juno Sospita, head r., 316,379,384,412,472, 480 Jupiter standing facing, holding thunderbolt in r. hand, eagle in 1. hand, 445 Jupiter standing between Juno and Minerva, 296 Jupiter seated 1., 449 Jupiter in biga of elephants 1., 269 Jupiter in quadriga L, holding reins in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 420, 422 Jupiter in quadriga 1., driven by Victory, 28, 29,30 Jupiter in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 350A Jupiter in quadriga r., holding sceptre in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 285
Jupiter in quadriga r., holding thunderbolt in 1. hand, branch in r. hand, 285 Jupiter in quadriga r., holding reins and thunderbolt in 1. hand, sceptre in r. hand, 325 Jupiter in quadriga r., holding reins and thunderbolt in 1. hand, branch in r. hand, 256, 257 Jupiter in quadriga r., holding sceptre and reins in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 221, 227, 238, 241, 248, 273, 276, 279, 310, 311 Jupiter in quadriga r., driven by Victory, holding sceptre in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 42 Jupiter in quadriga r., driven by Victory, holding spear in 1. hand, thunderbolt in r. hand, 271 Jupiter, bust r., wearing diadem, 460 Jupiter, terminal bust r., 447 Jupiter, head r., 358, 445, 487 Jupiter, laureate head r., standard obverse type of victoriatus from 44 to 168, also on 95 (on half-victoriatus), 311, 326, 331, 332, 345. 364» 377. 379, 385. 398, 459, 474, 549 Jupiter, laureate head r., sceptre over shoulder, 348 Jupiter Ammon, head r., 509, 546 Jupiter Libertas, 391 Juturna, fountain of, 335 Knife, 406, 418, 500; see also Dagger, Sword Knife*, 109, 120 Knucklebone, 14, 20, 25, 27 Q. Labienus, head r., 524 Lares Praestites seated facing, 298 Laurel-branch, 501 Laurel-branch*, 293, 326,434, 474, 494, 498, 499, 500 Laurel-wreath binding pileus or cap or helmet, 98A, 263, 266, 314, 385, 463, 515 Laurel-wreath as border, 232, 253, 263, 271, 290, 324, 336, 341, 342, 358, 411, 418, 464. 474, 48i, 535, 537, 538 Laurel-wreath*, 314, 353, 376, 448 Leuconoe, bust r., 420 Liber, head r., 266, 341, 343, 385, 386, 449, 494 Libera, head r., 386, 462 Libertas in biga 1., 391 Libertas in quadriga r., 266, 270 Libertas, bust r., 391, 392, 500 Libertas, head r., 428,433,449,473,498,499, 500, 501, 502, 505, 506 Lictors, two, 433 Lion standing 1., 533
864
Types Male head, severed*, see Horseman 1. Mars standing facing, 494 Mars standing r., 494 Mars walking 1., 306 Mars in quadriga r., holding spear and shield in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 290 Mars in quadriga r., holding spear, shield and reins in 1. hand, trophy in r. hand, 244,252 ?Mars in quadriga r., holding shield in 1. hand, 232 Mars, helmeted bust seen from behind, 345 Mars, helmeted bust r., 234, 429, 497 Mars, helmeted head 1., 13, 21, 27, 319, 320 Mars, helmeted head r., 13, 21, 25, 27; standard obverse type of Mars/Eagle gold, 44,50, 72, 88, 105, 106; also on 296, 335, 400, 450 Marsyas walking 1., 363 Mask, sec Pan, Silenus Mask*, 494 Mask, comic*, 410 Mask, tragic*, 410 Mast with pennant*, 239 Mast and sail*, 213 Medusa, head 1., 395 Medusa, head facing, 453 Medusa, head facing*, 445, 463; see also Gorgoneion* Mercury, terminal statue, 418 Macedonia, 432, 484 Mercury, terminal bust r., wearing winged diadem, 418 Macedonian shield decorated with elephant's Mercury, bust r., caduceus over shoulder, head, 263, 369 Macedonian shield*, 263, 267, 437 362, 480 (Male) figure, togate, 372 Mercury, bust r., wearing winged diadem, 449 (Male) figure, togate, in biga 1., 404 Mercury, head 1., 14, 25, 35, 36 (Male) figure, togate, entering biga, 392 Mercury, head r., 38, 41, 42, 43; standard ob(Male) figure, togate, crowning Ptolemy V, verse type of sextans from 56 to 219; see 419 a/50 next entry (except for 98A); standard obMale figure wearing radiate crown, 494 verse type of semuncia from 38 to 106 (exMale figure standing facing, holding sceptre cept for 39 and 98A; note also 160,308, 315 in r. hand, branch in 1. hand, 531 and 316); obverse type of quadrans on 97, Male figure on goat r., 288 98A; also on 405 Male figure looking at captive, 438 Mercury, head r., caduceus over shoulder, Male figure raising kneeling female figure, 510 variant obverse type of sextans, 134, 142, Male figure, see also Provocatio scene 145, 149, 179, 180, 199, 214; standard obMale figure, holding staff*, 354 verse type of sextans from 239 to 335 Male figures, two, standing facing each other, (except on 246 and part of 335); also on 472 312 Mercury, see also Hercules, Male head Male figures, two, seated on bench, 330, 351 Meta*, 124 Male bust r., 448 Minerva standing 1., crowning Jupiter, 296 Male head r., 513. 514, 5i5> 519 Minerva standing 1., holding trophy, 476 Male head r., wearing winged diadem, 341 Minerva standing r., holding Victory, 494 Male head r., with attributes of Apollo and Minerva in quadriga 1., holding spear and Mercury, 352 reins in r. hand, trophy in 1. hand, 342 Male head r., with attributes of Apollo, Mer- Minerva in quadriga r., holding shield and cury and Neptune, 352 reins in 1. hand, spear in r. hand, 354
Lion walking r., 16, 489 Lion, Nemean, 380 Lion*, 264, 409; see also Battle* Lion's-skin, 444 Lion's-skin*, 461 Lituus, 466, 467. 489» 537. 538 Lituus and jug, 522; see also Jug and lituus Lituus*, 242, 243, 264, 285, 334, 359, 402, 423, 425, 426, 428, 434, 460, 468, 480, 488, 492, 496, 497, 509, 5 " . 5i6, 5i7> 521. 526, 533> 540 L. Livineius Regulus, head r., 494 Luna appearing to Sulla, 480 Luna in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand (horses prancing), 133, 136, 158, 159, 161, 163 Luna in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, goad in r. hand (horses galloping), 140,141,156, 187, 230 Luna in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 207, 474 Luna in biga r., holding reins in both hands, 303 Luna, head r., 480 Lyre, 285, 472, 501 Lyre*, 320, 371, 410, 494, 504 Lyres, two*, 416, 417 Lyre-key*, 410
865
Indices Minerva in quadriga r., holding spear and reins in 1. hand, trophy in r. hand, 342 Minerva in quadriga r., holding spear in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 341 Minerva, helmeted bust 1., 328 Minerva, helmeted bust r., 348, 465, 494 Minerva, helmeted head 1., 14,17,23,25, 35, 36, 38,41 Minerva, helmeted head r., 2, 17, 35, 36, 41, 43, 44 (on dupondius), 69 (on dupondius); standard obverse type of triens from 56 to 350B (except for 341); also on 98A (on halfvictoriatus and sextans), 389, 454 Minerva, helmeted head facing, 37 Modius, 494 Modius*, 242, 243, 245, 502 Afwrex-shell*, 187 Muses, nine, 410 Nemean lion, see Lion, Nemean Nemesis standing r., 494 Neptune standing 1., 511 Neptune, statue of, surmounting Pharos of Messana, 511 Neptune in biga of sea-horses r., 399 Neptune, head r., 420, 507 Neptune, head r., hair tied with band, trident over shoulder, 511 Neptune, head r., trident over shoulder, 510 Neptune, laureate head r., trident over shoulder, 348, 390 Neptune, see also Male head Numa Pompilius standing holding lituus, 334 Numa Pompilius, head r., 346, 446 Oak-spray*, 13 Oak-wreath as border, 305, 506, 511 Oak-wreath*, 304, 3©5, 315, 316, 35©A, 448, 452 Oath-taking scene, 28, 29, 234 Octavian (the coins do not substantiate the remark of Dio xlviii, 34, 3 that Octavian shaved his beard off in 39), head r., 490, 492,493, 494.495, 497, 5*7, 518, 5*3, 5*5, 526, 528, 529, 534, 535, 538, 540 Octavia, head r., 527, 533 Oil-jar, 234 Olive-branch*, 422, 426, 431 Olla, 473 Ostia, harbour of, 346 Owl on Corinthian helmet, 463 Owl on shield, 455 Owl, human-headed, 474 Owl*, 135 Ox's head, 455 Oxen, yoke of 1., 321; see also Ploughman
?Palaemon, 390 Palladium*, 458 Palm-branch, 22 Palm-branch tied with fillet, 440 Palm-branch*, 249, 296, 312, 326, 342, 343, 344, 358, 359,396, 419, 421, 436, 453, 463, 464,469, 477, 480; see also Branch, Cupid, Victory Palm-branch tied with fillet*, 464 Pan, bearded mask r., 341, 342, 449,451,464 Pan-pipe*, 449 Panther, 464, 494 Parthian horse, 524 Patera, 418 Patera*, 343, 385, 449, 460, 462, 491 ?Pax in biga r., holding sceptre and reins in 1. hand, branch in r. hand, 262 Pax, head r., 480 Pedum*, 449 Pegasus 1., 18, 26 Pegasus r., 18, 26, 27, 341, 395 Pegasus flying r., 4 Penates, see Dei Penates Pentagram*, 105, 129 Perseus of Macedon and sons, 415 Phalerae, 497, 513 Pharos of Messana, 511 Philip V of Macedon, head r., 293 Pietas standing 1., 477, 494, 516 Pietas, head r., 308, 374, 450 Pig*, 341, 342; see also Sow* Pileus (see W. Helbig, SBAW1880,487), 508 Pileus*, 266, 270, 391, 392 Pilei*, 98A, l 8 i , 278, 342, 353 Plectrum, 501 Plectrum*, 410 Plough, 525 Plough*, 337, 449, 461 Ploughman with yoke of oxen 1., 378 Polos*, 508 Cn. Pompeius Magnus triumphing, 402 Cn. Pompeius Magnus, head r., 470,477,483, 511; see also 479 Cn. Pompeius junior, head r., 477, 511 Sex. Pompeius, head r., 511 Q. Pompeius Rufus, head r., 434 Ports, for voting, 292 Poppy-heads*, 405 A. Postumius, head r., 450 Prawn*, 156 Proserpina, bust r., 405 Provocatio scene, 301 Prow 1., 36, 38, 40, 41, 350A, 350B, 353 Prow r., 35, 38, 41, 42, 43; standard reverse type of bronze coinage from 56 to 530 (ex-
866
Types to 250 (except for 97/7b, 98A/7; note also Prow (cont.) 285, 289, 293, 308-various types; 3 0 5 cept for part of 69, part of 72,82, part of 97, Corinthian helmet) and on 290, 315; stanpan of 98A, part of 99, 234, 247, part of 2 dard obverse type of denarius from 44 to 53, 285, part of 289, part of 290, part of 286 (except for 234, 281-various types; 293, part of 296, 305, part of 308, 315, 316, 269, part of 282,288, part of 464 - Phrygian part of 340, part of 341, part of 342, part of helmet, see also 128); standard obverse 346, part of 348, 350, 353, 476. 535. 55°); type of quinarius from 44 to 156 (except for also on 446, 521 97, 98A, part of 102-Phrygian helmet); Prow r., on which stands trophy, 519 standard obverse type of sestertius from 44 Prow r., stem decorated with female head, to 98B (except for 98A - Phrygian helmet); 205 also on 289, 294, 295, 299, 300, 301, 302, Prow*, 335, 457, 469, 507, 511. 533. 53$. 543 310, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 337, 367, 387, Prow-stem, 357, 506; see also Trophy, naval 388, 464 (plumed) Prow-stem*, 296 Roma, helmeted head r. (Corinthian helmet), Prows, three, r., 342 281, 287, 305 (plumed), 309 (plumed), 381, Ptolemy V, 419 Puppy*, 219, see also Dog 435. 449. 469 Puteal Scribonianum, 416, 417 Roma, helmeted head r. (Phrygian helmet), 19, 21, 22,24,26,27, 41, 97, 98A, 102, 269, Quaestors, two, 330 282, 288, 464 (plumed); see also 128 T. Quinctius Flamininus, head r., 548 ?Roma, laureate bust r., wearing diadem, 291 Quirinus, laureate head r., 427 ?Roma, bust r., 343, 462 Quiver*, 222, 254, 336, 494; see also Bow, Rose*, 505 Diana Rostra, 473 Rostrum tridens*, 62, 114, 273, 460, 497 Radiate crown*, 494 Rudder, 289, 340, 393 Ram r., 389 Rudder*, 117A (see also 117B), 289, 464, 480, Ram*, 123 494. 5 " . 5i6, 525 Rudder on prow*, 391 Ram's head*, 550 Ruminalis Ficus, see Ficus Ruminalis Rampart, 514 Rat*, 297 Sabine women, rape of, 344 Raven, 489 Sagum*, 28, 29, 381 Rod*, see Scipio*, Staff*, Vindicta* Roma standing facing, holding spear in r. Salus, head r., 337, 442 Sandal*, 410 hand, 329 Roma standing facing, holding sword in 1. Saturn in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, harpa in r. hand, 317 hand, 1. foot on wolf's head, 391 Roma standing 1., holding sceptre in 1. hand, Saturn, head r., 421, 441 Saturn, laureate head 1., 35, 36, 38, 41, 313, 281 Roma clasping hands with Italia, 403 349 Roma seated 1., holding sceptre in 1. hand, Saturn, laureate head r., 41, 43; standard obsword in r. hand, 464 verse type of semis from 56 to 350B (except Roma seated 1., holding sword in 1. hand, for 82 and 341); also on 293 (on uncia), 330 sceptre in r. hand, 421 Scabbard, 8 Roma seated 1., holding sword in 1. hand, Scales*, 366, 463 spear in r. hand, 335 Scales balanced on cornucopiae*, 460 Roma seated r., holding spear in 1. hand, 287 Scallop-shell, 14, 21, 25, 27 Roma, helmeted bust 1. (plumed Attic helmet), Sceptre, 398, 447. 5 " 292, 494 Sceptre*, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 42, 221, Roma, helmeted bust r., 380 (plumed Phryg223, 227, 231, 238, 240, 241, 248, 262, 273, ian helmet), 381 and 435 (plumed Corinthian 276, 279, 285,296, 310, 313, 320, 325, 336, 343, 348, 361, 393, 397, 4*0, 421, 426, 428, helmet) 449, 460, 463, 464, 468, 470, 477, 480, 485, Roma, helmeted head 1. (Attic helmet), 35,38, 317. 3i8 494, 507, 531, 544 Roma, helmeted head r. (Attic helmet), 41,42, Sceptre with wreath, 393, 43s 43; standard obverse type of uncia from 56 Scipio*, 106, 112, 130, 131
867
Indices Scorpion*, 392, 420, 422 Scroll*, 410 Scylla, 511 Scylla, two heads of, 511 Sea-battle, 483 Sea-horses, biga of, 399 Sella, 502, see also Subsellium Sella curulis, see Curule chair C. Servilius Ahala, head r., 433 Shell, see Scallop-shell She-wolf 1., 388 She-wolf r., suckling twins, 20, 39, 235, 287 She-wolf suckling twins*, 183 Shield, 7; see also Macedonian shield Shield*, 128, 143, 271, 329, 401, 429, 43°. 437, 448, 450, 452, 454, 455, 468, 469, 470, 474,476, 480, 482, 494, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 509. 510, 519, 536 Shield inscribed M*, 264, 370 Shield inscribed QVIRIN*, 268 Shield*, see also Macedonian shield* Ship 1., 290, 511 Ship r., 247, 305, 307, 483, 544 Ships, two, r., 547 Ships, see also Harbour, Sea-battle Shrine, from which protrudes prow, 348 Shrine, see also Venus Cloacina Sibyl, bust r., 491 Sibyl, head r., 411, 464, 474 Sicilia, 401 Sickle*, 25 Silenus, bearded mask r., 337, 341, 342 Simpulum, 489, 532, 537, 538 Simpulum*, 419, 492, 494, 502 Snake, 412, 472, 480; see also Altar, Ceres Snake*, 39,42,69,72,379.427.442,453,476, 491 Sol in quadriga facing, 309 Sol in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 250 Sol, bust facing, 39, 494 Sol, head r., 303, 390,437,463,474,494,496, 533 Sol, head*, 310 Sol, temple of, 496 Soldier attacking rampart, 514 Soldier receiving palm-branch, 469 Soldier taking standard from second soldier, 513 Soldiers, two, facing each other, 423 Soldiers, see also Battle, Horseman, Warrior Sow 1., 9 Sow lying down, 312 Sow*, 121 Spanish cities, personified, 470
Spear* (A. Alfoldi, AJA 1959, 1 produces no certain example from the Republic of the spear as a symbol of imperium), 271, 291, 292, 304, 306, 312, 329, 335, 341, 342, 345. 354. 361, 379. 392, 394, 395, 400, 407, 429, 430, 435, 448, 469, 470, 474, 476, 482, 494. 497. 505, 506, 507, 509, 513, 515, 519, 533. 536 Spearhead*, 83, 88, 145, 296 Sphinx r., 464 Sprinkler, see Aspergillum Staff*, 298, 502; see also Decempeda*, Scipio* Staff, crooked*, see Corn-ear and crooked staff* Staff, magistrate's*, 242, 243, 326, 354, 404 Stag, 82, 455 Stag*, 448 Stags, biga of, 222, 336, 400 Standard, manipular, 365, 441,497, 525, 544, 546 Standard, of cohort, 544 Standard inscribed HIS*, 437 Standard*, see also Boar-standard* Standards, two*, 335, 513 Star, 480; see also Crescent Star*, 1, 2, 15, 17, 113, 196, 247, 281, 296, 335, 410, 444, 445. 468, 474. 476, 480, 483, 494. 521, 528, 533, 534, 535, 540, 550 Star in crescent*, 344, 550 Stars, two*, 12, 39, 98A, 309, 310, 411 Stars, four*, 303, 426 Statue, equestrian, 291, 293, 381, 425, 490, 497. 518; see also Desultor Statue, see also Jupiter, Mercury, Neptune Stork*, 374, 516 Strigil, 234 Subsellium, 330, 351, 473, see also Sella Sword, 8 Sword*, 23 et passim Syrinx, see Pan-pipe* Tablet for telling fortunes, 405 Tablet*, 335, 413, 428, 437 Tank, head 1., 509 Tarpeia, killing of, 344 Tatius, bearded head r., 344, 404 Temple, 391, 424, 439. 5*9. 54°; see also Capitoline temple, dementia, Sol, Venus, Vesta Temple, pediment of, 405 Tessera nummularia, 473 Thunderbolt, 14,21, 25,27, 522, 523; see also Cornucopiae, Eagle Thunderbolt*, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 42, 119, 221, 227, 238, 241, 248, 256, 257, 269, 271. 273. 276, 279. 285, 296, 298, 310, 325,
868
Types Thunderbolt (cont.) 348, 350A, 352, 353, 354, 377, 391, 420, 422, 437, 445, 474, 550 Thyrsus*, 296, 353, 386, 464, 494 Tiara, Armenian, see Armenian tiara Togate figure, see (Male) figure, togate Tongs*, 263, 266, 298, 314, 416, 417, 464 Torch*, 222, 296, 336, 341, 342, 385, 427, 449, 494 Torque as border, 295, 337 Torque*, 91 Tortoise, 24, 449 Tortoise*, 410 Trident tied with fillet, i 1 Trident, see also Trophy, naval Trident*, 115, 296, 348, 390, 399, 420, 483, 507. 511 Tridents, two, 12 Trinacrus, 457 Tripod, 6, 10, 385, 411, 498, 499, 500, 502, 537, 538 Tripod*, 254, 296, 410, 511 Triskeles, 445 Triskeles*, 329, 439, 457 Triumphal quadriga r., 348 Triumphator in quadriga 1., holding palmbranch in r. hand, trophy and reins in 1. hand, 358 Triumphator in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, caduceus in r. hand, 367 Triumphator in quadriga r., holding laurelbranch in 1. hand, staff in r. hand, 326 Triumphus, ?438, 472 Trophy, standard reverse type of victoriatus from 44 to 168; also on 281, 415, 427, 439, 452, 460, 468, 482, 503, 504, 505, 506, 510, 519> 536; see also Victory Trophy, naval, 438, 507* 5n> 53$ Trophy*, 244, 252, 255, 306, 335, 342, 358, 419, 429, 455. 470, 472, 476, 497 Trophies, two, 359, 437 Trophies, three, 426 Turibulum*, 516 Tusculum, 515 Tympanum*, 491 Ulysses standing r., 362 Ulysses holding staff*, 149 Valetudo standing 1., 442 Venus standing facing, Cupid flying above shoulder, 391 Venus standing 1., looking at herself in mirror, 494 Venus standing 1., holding scales in r. hand, sceptre in 1. hand, 463
Venus standing 1., holding Victory in r. hand, sceptre in 1. hand, 480 Venus seated facing, Cupid flying above shoulder, 494 Venus in biga r.,holding reins in r.hand, goad and reins in 1. hand, 360 Venus in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 258 Venus in biga r., holding sceptre and reins in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 313, 349 Venus in biga of Cupids 1., 320 Venus, bust 1., wearing diadem, star in hair, 468 Venus, bust r., wearing diadem, 391, 457, 458, 481 Venus, bust r., wearing diadem and veil, 360 Venus, laureate bust r., wearing diadem, 424, 426,430 Venus, head r., 482 Venus, head r., wearing diadem, 357,359, 375, 376, 382, 463, 465, 468, 480, 485 ?Venus, head r., wearing diadem, sometimes laureate, 419 Venus, head decorating prow-stem*, ?2O5,3i3 Venus Cloacina, shrine of, 494 Venus Erycina, temple of, 424 Vesta, head 1., 413 Vesta, head r., 406, 428 Vesta, temple of, 428 Victimarius leading goat, 334 Victory facing, holding wreath in r. hand, palm-branch in 1. hand, 550 Victory facing, leading four horses, 453 Victory standing 1., holding caduceus in r. hand, patera in 1. hand, 460 Victory standing 1., holding wreath in r. hand, palm-branch in 1. hand, 545, 548 Victory walking 1., holding palm-branch in r. hand, bowl of fruit in 1. hand, 550 Victory walking 1., holding trophy, 465 Victory standing r., holding wreath in r. hand, palm-branch in 1. hand, 340, 494, 546 Victory standing r., holding wreath in r. hand, sword and spear in 1. hand, 340 Victory standing r., holding wreath and palmbranch in 1. hand, raising r. hand, 348 Victory walking r., carrying palm-branch decorated with four wreaths, 436 Victory walking r., holding trophy, 465 Victory walking r., holding trophy in 1. hand and caduceus in r. hand, 448 Victory walking r., holding wreath in r. hand, palm-branch in 1. hand, 454, 502 Victory walking r., holding palm-branch in 1. hand, ?breaking diadem with both hands, 507
869
Indices Victory appearing to Sulla, 480 Victory on column, 346, 363 Victory on globe r., 546 Victory seated r., holding patera in r. hand, palm-branch in 1. hand, 343, 462 Victory crowning Juno in biga, 223, 240 Victory crowning Roma, 335, 421 Victory flying, crowning seated figure, 397,449 Victory driving quadriga of Jupiter, 28,29,30, 3i> 32, 33. 34, 42, 271 Victory attaching helmet to trophy, 296 Victory attaching wreath to palm-branch, 22 Victory inscribing shield attached to Gallic trophy, 333 Victory crowning trophy, standard reverse type of victoriatus from 44 to 168; also on 331, 332 (Gallic trophy), 345, 373, 489 Victory, holding palm-branch in 1. hand, crowning trophy with r. hand, 504 Victory, holding palm-branch in 1. hand, crowning Gallic trophy with r. hand, 326 Victory in biga 1., holding reins in both hands, 318 Victory in biga r., holding reins in both hands, 260, 300, 323, 337, 494 Victory in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, goad in r. hand, 197, 322 Victory in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 197, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 225, 226, 228, 245, 261, 274, 324, 480 Victory in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, palm-branch in r. hand, 289, 366 Victory in biga r., holding reins in 1. hand, wreath in r. hand, 284, 302, 344, 346, 387, 464. 473 Victory in biga r., holding palm-branch in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 328, 337 (see commentary) Victory in biga r., holding palm-branch and reins in 1. hand, whip in r. hand, 337 Victory in biga r., holding palm-branch and reins in 1. hand, wreath in r. hand, 383 Victory in biga r., holding wreath in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 485 Victory in triga r., holding reins in both hands, 299, 382 Victory in quadriga 1., holding wreath in r. hand, palm-branch and reins in 1. hand, 465 Victory in quadriga r., holding goad in 1. hand, reins in r. hand, 97, 99 Victory in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, palm-branch in r. hand, 366 Victory in quadriga r., holding reins in both hands, palm-branch in 1. hand, 280
Victory in quadriga r., holding reins in 1. hand, wreath in r. hand, 246,253,275,283, 352, 464 Victory in quadriga r., holding reins and palm-branch in 1. hand, wreath in r. hand, 249, 364, 465 Victory, bust r., 306, 341, 342, 365, 464, 472, 474. 475, 476, 480, 489, 494, 5 H Victory flying, crowning figure in chariot*, 247, 269, 270, 342, 367, 391 Victory in biga*, 348 Victory with palm-branch*, 340 Victory with wreath*, 61, 144, 217, 240, 247, 344, 348, 402, 470, 494 Victory with wreath, and spearhead*, 145 Villa Publica, 429 Vindicta*, 266, 270 Vine-branch*, see Butterfly and vine-branch* Vine-leaf*, 550 Vine-wreath*, 386 Virtus, helmeted bust r., 401 Virtus, head r., 403 Voting scene, 292, 413 Voting-urn, 266; see also Cista Vulcan, bust r., 263, 266, 314 Vulcan, bust*, 298 Warrior standing 1., holding spear in r. hand, 335 Warrior raising up fallen figure, 401 Warrior, fallen, 335 Warrior in biga r., holding carnyx in 1. hand, 282 Warrior in biga r., assisting togate figure into biga, 392 Warrior in quadriga r., holding shield in 1. hand, 232 Warrior, see also Gallic warrior, Soldier Wheel, 24 Wheel*, 79 Wild beast fight, 494 Wing*, 131 Wolf r., placing stick on fire, 472 Wolf, see also She-wolf Wolfs head*, 391 Wreath, 393, 435, 513 Wreath of corn-ears, 450, 494 Wreath of fruits as border, 265, 371 Wreath*, 110,239,253,260,280,285,291,296, 313, 329, 387, 398, 410, 418, 419, 434,440, 452, 463, 465, 473, 480, 497, 544; see also Cupid, Laurel-wreath, Minerva, Victory Wreaths, four, 426 Wreaths, four*, 436
870
,,316
Types (b) i. Symbols as die-marks This index does not cover the issue of C. Piso Frugi, for which see Index I (b) ii, nor those of L. Papius and L. Roscius Fabatus, for which see Plates LXVI-LXIX, nor those of L. Piso Frugi, C. Vibius Pansa and L. Iulius Bursio, of which I hope eventually to publish die-studies; I include, however, a reference in brackets to the symbols on that part of the issue of C. Censorinus, no. 346/1, which is discussed in NC1971,143. Nor does this index cover those symbols in other issues for which I have not been able to find an adequate description and which are illustrated on Plate LXX. The numbers given are those of the catalogue; it should be noted that in view of the difficulty of describing the tiny symbols used as die-marks I have found it much more difficult than in the case of substantive types to achieve anything like consistency; it should also be noted that within one issue there may occur several variants of the same basic symbol and even the same symbol several times. Acorn, 405 Acrostolium, 405, 409 (346) Altar, 343. 361, 378, 385 Amphora, 378, 385, 396 Anchor, 22, 336, 343, 344, 378, 385. 405 Anchor and dolphin, 344 Ant, 342, 343, 363, 378, 409 Antelope, head of, 346, 378 Anvil, 343, 409 (346) Apex, 340, 405, 409 Arrow, 330, 340, 343, 344, 346, 363, 366,405 (346) Arrow with thong, 344 Arrow-head, 378 (346) Arrows, two, 344, 346 (346) Ass, 346 Ass, head of, 341 Axe, 378, 385 Ball, 343 Bee, 398, 405 Beetle, 378 Bell, 378 Bells, two, 342 Bidens, 343, 361, 378 Bipennis, 340, 343, 378, 385, 405 Bird, 346, 361, 398, 405 (346) Birds, two, 346 (346) Bit, 378 Boot, 385 Bow, 330, 340, 343, 344, 346, 405 (346) Bow and arrow, 344 Bow and quiver, 344, 385 Branch, 344, 361, 363 (346) Bucranium, 340, 343, 346, 405, 409 (346) Bull, head of, 344, 378 Butterfly, 340, 343, 378, 385, 405 (346) Caduceus, 22, 336, 340, 341, 343, 344, 346, 365. 385. 405, 409 (346) Candelabrum, 385, 405 Capricorn, 343 Carnyx, 343, 366
Chopper, (346) Club, 22, 340, 343, 344, 346, 378, 385, 405 Cock, 385 Column, 346 Comb, 346, 366, 385 Compasses, (346) Corn-ear, 22, 336, 343, 344, 346, 361, 363, 365» 378, 405, 409 (346) Corn-grain, 340, 405, 409 Cornucopiae, 22,340, 341,342, 343,346,361, 365. 378, 385 (346) Cornucopiae, double, 346 Crab, 336, 363, 366, 378, 385, 399 Crescent, 22, 330, 340, 341, 343, 346, 361, 365, 378, 385. 405 Crescent and star, 346, 366, 409 (346) Crescent and two stars, 346 Cricket, 405 Crook, 343, 405 Cuirass, 343, 344, 378 Cup, 340, 378, 405 Cupid, 346 Cymbals, 342 Dagger, 385, 405 Decempeda, 409 Dioscuri, caps of, 341, 366 (346) Discus, 396 Dividers, 385, 405 Dog, 22 Dog, head of, 378 Dolphin, 22,336,340,341,343,378,385,399, 405, 409 (346) Duck, 336 Duck, head of, 340, 385 Eagle, 343 Eagle, head of, 342 Ear, human, 337, 340, 343, 346, 361, 378,405 Fasces, 363, 405 Feather, 361, 378 Fibula, 343, 378
871
Indices Oil-lamp, 385 Olive-branch, 378 Owl, 340, 342, 385
Fish, 344, 366, 378, 385, 398, 399, 409 (346) Flabellum, 378 Flail, 340, 405 Flower, 342, 361, 363, 378, 405 Flute, 342 Fly. 336. 343. 346. 378, 405 Foot, human, 378, 385 Frog, 336, 378, 385, 398 Fruit, 378, 405
Pail, 405 Palm-branch, 22,340,341,342,343,344,346> 361, 363, 365, 378, 385, 405, 409 Palm-branch tied with fillet, 344, 346 Pan, mask of, 343, 385 Peacock, 385, 405 Pedum, 342, 343, 405 Pelta, 22, 366, 378, 385 Pentagram, 22, 385, 405 Perfume-jar, 385 Petasus, 378 Piercer, 385 Pilots, 340, 378, 385 (346) Plectrum, 385 Plough, 23, 336, 343, 344, 366, 409 Plumb-bob, 385 Poppy-head, 343, 344. 361, 378,385,405,409 Poppy-heads, two, 346 Prawn, 378, 398 Prow, 346 Prow-stem, 343, 365. 378, 409
Goat, head of, 340, 342 Grapes, bunch of, 22, 344, 361, 378, 385 Grasshopper, 336, 337, 342, 344, 361, 378, 409 (346) Gryphon, 336 Hammer, 340, 344, 378, 409 (346) Hare, 330, 346, 378 Harpa, 344 Hat, 22 Head, human, 346 Helmet, 22, 23, 342, 343, 344, 346, 366, 378, 385 Heron, 378, 385, 399 Hog, 346 Hook, 385 Hoop, 385, 396 Horse, 378 Horse, head of, 341 Horse, leg of, 405
Quiver, 336, 366, 405 Ram, head of, 336, 344 Rectangle, 344 Ring, signet, 378 Rod, 405 Rudder, 22,340, 343, 344, 346, 365, 385. 4©9 (346)
Ibis, 378 Ivy-leaf, 343, 361, 405, 409 Jelly-fish, 378 Jug. 405 Key, 385, 405 Knife, 336, 340, 343, 344, 346, 366. 378, 405 Knife-blade, 378, 385 Knife, tanner's, 340 Ladder, 343, 378, 385, 405 Laurel-branch, 405, 409 Leaf, 346, 363, 378, 385 Lecythus, 385 Lituus, 343, 344. 346, 405 Lizard, 340, 344, 346. 361, 366, 378, 385,405, 409 Lotus-flower, 340, 363, 378, 405 Lyre, 343, 344, 346, 363, 378 Lyre-key, 378, 385. 4°9 Mask, 343 (346) Mouse, 378
Sandal, 378 Scales, 378, 405 Sceptre, 343, 344, 378 Sceptre tied with fillet, 409 Scorpion, 336, 343, 344, 366, 378, 385, 398, 409 (346) Scroll, 405 Sea-anemone, 378, 399 Sea-horse, 405 Sheaf of corn, 378 Shell, 361, 378 Shield, 22, 346, 363, 378, 385, 405 Shield (Macedonian), 385 Ship, 344 Shoe, 346, 378 Shovel, 385 Sickle, 366, 405 Silenus, mask of, 385 Simpulum, 378, 385, 405, 409 Sistrum, 342 Snake, 343, 346, 366, 378, 385, 398, 409 (346)
872
Types Spear, 340, 343, 344> 346, 3^5. 366, 405. 409 (346) Spear, winged, 346 Spear-head, 385, 409 Spears, two, 346 Sponge, 399 Squid, 399, 409 Staff, 405, 409 Staff with double hook, 344, 366, 378, 385, 405, 409 (346) Staff with hook, 344, 361 Stag, 344 Stag, head of, 346 (346) Stag, forepart of, 342 Standard, 343, 366, 405, 409 Star, 22, 330, 340, 341, 342, 346, 361, 365, 378, 385. 405, 409 Stilus, 344, 378, 385, 405 Stork, 23, 363 Stove, 385 Strigil, 344, 346, 378, 385, 396, 405 Strigil and oil-jar, 346 Strigil and vase, 344 Sword, 340, 343, 344, 366, 378 Sword in scabbard, 343, 366 Sword in scabbard with belt, 22 Syrinx, 342, 346, 366 Tessera, 378 Thunderbolt, 342, 343, 344, 346, 361, 365, 366, 385 (346) Thyrsus, 342, 343, 344, 346, 361, 366, 378, 385, 409 Thyrsus tied with fillet, 344, 346
Tongs, 343, 385 Top, 378 Torch, 22,343,344,346,378,385.396.4O5.409 Torque, 378 Tortoise, 336, 343, 385 Tree, 409 (346) Triangle, 342, 343 Trident, 22, 330, 336,340,343.344. 346,363, 365, 366, 378, 405, 409 (346) Trident and dolphin, 344 Trident tied with fillet, 346 Tripod, 22, 365, 385 Triskeles, 344 Trophy, 343, 344, 366, 378, 384, 405 Turtle, 361, 399 Vase, 378, 405 Vase with handles, 22 Victory and wreath, 342 Vine-branch, 344 Vine-leaf, 378, 405, 409 -Water-bottle, 378 Wedge, 346 Wheel, 344, 385, 405 Wheel and two stars, 346 Wing, 22, 337, 340, 343, 344, 346, 361, 363, 366, 405, 409 (346) Wolf, head of, 378 Wreath, 22, 342, 343, 346, 363, 365, 378, 385, 396, 405 (346) ~ . 330 PI. XLII, 22,
330
ii. Control-marks on issue of C. Piso Frugi
On la: Numerals S II X Letters ra BI M
Q R S X
Obverse die
37 42
43 29 23
47 14 15 32»" 1
48
Greek letters
r
26
r (with long stem)
36
e
21
n
Y 0
Y Symbols Anchor Apex Arrow upwards
Bee Butterfly Caduceus Corn-ear Comucopiae Crescent
873
6 3 32 49 22
45 46 39 4 30 11
28 44
Indices Eagle Feather Fly Foot Grasshopper Head-dress of Isis Jug Lituut Lizard Olive-branch Pedum Quiver Sceptre Scorpion Scorpion with butterfly Snake on caduceus Snake on staff Squid Stork Thunderbolt Tongs Vine-leaf Voting-tablet with V Wheel PI. LXX, 103 PL LXX, 102 Numerals (marks above unless otherwise stated) 5, horseman r., whip II, horseman r., palm X, horseman r., palm Letters 6, horseman r., palm B, horseman r., palm E, horseman r. P, horseman r., wing G, horseman r., palm H, horseman r., palm 1, horseman r., whip L, horseman r., palm M, horseman r., palm R, horseman r., palm 2, horseman r., whip S, horseman r., palm S, horseman r., whip T , horseman r., whip V, horseman r., palm A/, horseman r., whip X, horseman r., palm Greek letters r, horseman r., palm A, horseman r., palm
1
52
34 24 50
A, horseman r., whip S, horseman r., palm TT, horseman r., palm P, horseman r., palm 0, horseman r., palm
17,46 27
38 13
4
12
31 40 27
9 13 41 51 18 10
8 25 20
5 7 38
35 33 17 19 16
Reverse die
25 31 14
46 35 6
9 55 42 10
40
8 56 7 3O 32 23
34 19
58 34>" 12
Symbols Arrow r., horseman r., Phrygian cap, palm Arrow-head downwards, horseman r., conical cap, palm Basket with strap, horseman r., whip Club, horseman r., palm Corn-ear, horseman r., palm Fish, horseman r., conical cap, palm Grasshopper, horseman r., whip Ivy-leaf, horseman r., palm Lituus, horseman r., whip Lizard, horseman r., whip Lotus, horseman r., conical cap, palm Mallet, horseman r., palm (PI. LXX, 86) Palm-branch with fillet above, torch below, horseman r., whip Quiver, horseman r., wing Scorpion, horseman r., wing Shield above, sword below, horseman r., torch Spear with knobs, horseman r., palm Staff with hook, horseman r., whip Staff with double hook, horseman r., conical cap, palm Star, horseman r., torch Strigil, horseman r., whip Sword, horseman r., palm Curved sword, horseman r. Torch, horseman r., palm Torque, horseman r., whip Whip, horseman r., palm Wreath, horseman r., whip PI. LXX, 107, horseman r., palm PL LXX, 105, horseman r., conical cap, palm PL LXX, 104, horseman r., whip PL LXX, 106, horseman r., whip
57 26 41
48 11
15 50
33 5 21
16
44 36 1
3 37 24
47
53 52 28 18
43 49 29 2
39 54 22 20
51
On l b : No control-mark Obverse die Bust 1. with caduceus 34 144 Bust r. with bow and quiver lti Bust L, laureate with bow and quiver Numerals (Head with hair tied with band unless otherwise stated) Headl.,£ Head L, :
..., Head r.
874
71 80 70
Types : £ , Headr. •::, Head r. Headl., S £ Headl., S: Headl., S:S::,Headr. S::-, Headr. •I, Head r. 1-0, Head r. Head 1., l-£ I:, Head r. l:£, Headr. I :•, Head r. Headl., IS: = , Head r. Ill::, Headr. IX:, Headr. XI-£,Headr. XIIS, Headr. XIII:: (upwards), Headr. XVI (upwards), Headr. XXI (upwards), Headr. XXIX (upwards), Headr. II, Head r. I X , Head r. 1XXI (upwards), Headr. C VI (upwards), Head r. C XI (upwards), Head r. CXX (upwards), Headr. CXXI (upwards), Headr. CX1V (upwards), Headr. C±X (upwards), Head r. CXD, Headr. CC X (upwards), Head r. CCXV (upwards), Head. r. CCl (upwards), Head r. DXX (upwards), Headr. ©CC (upwards), Head r. d, Head r. (A > Head r. tfo, Head r. ^ , Head r. -w, Head r. Letters Head 1., D Q, Laureate head r. Head 1., 3 •3, Head r. I , Head r. Laureate head 1., I Head 1., I —, Head r. N, Head r. P, head r. S, Head r.
Head 1., 8 2, Head r. •3, Laureate head r.
6o 68 69
56 Monograms and double letters A, Head r. 13, Head r. 13, Head r. IS, Head r.
67 8i
46 57 76 6i SO
44 63 47 4 38 36 112
87 18 iuy
6
84
Letters with hooks A , Head r. £>, Head r. ~B, Head r.
85 130
7 3
83 43 128 120
1H, Headr.
89
Greek letters A, Head r. A, Head r. P, Head r. i; Head r. Y, Head r.
96 136 97
Greek letters with hooks "y, head r.
14 12 1
21
118
62
134 127
Z, Head r. £ , Headr.
93
27 29
&, Head r.
92
26
Symbols Apex, Head r. Arrow downwards, Head r. Arrow-head upwards, Head r. Head 1., Arrow-head upwards Aspergillum, Head r. Axe, Head r. Bidens, head r. Bow, Head r. Head 1., Bucranium Caduceus with club as handle, Head r. Club, Head r. Club, Head r. Head 1., Crescent Dolphin, Head r. Eagle, head of, Head r. Ear, Head r. Hammer, Head r. Head 1., Hand Head 1., Harpa Ivy-leaf, Head r. Key, Head r. Knucklebone, head r. Ladder, Head r. Leaf, Head r. Lituus, Head r.
5
10
33 94 9 141
8 16 11 116
2 30 103 121
73 66 102
58 19
55 99 133 115
59 140
875
91
125 117
139 54 138 100
88 53 143 123 90
74 77 24
79 114 122
142 82 72 15
45 126 108
98
Indices Lizard, Head r. 48 Head 1., Lizard 22 Lotus, Head r. 39 Lyre, Head r. 119 Mallet, Head r. 132 Head 1., Mallet 105 Meta, Head r. 124 Oil-jar and strigil, Head r. 35 109 Palm-branch tied with fillet, Head r. Pennant, Head r. 13 Pileus, Head r. 41,104 Ram's head, Head r. 78 Scales, Head r. 86 Head )., Sceptre 95 Simpulum, Head r. 64 Snake, Head r. 49 Staff with double hook, Head r. 42 Star, Head r. 75 Head 1., Stove 101 Strigil, Head r. 23 Thyrsus, Head r. 37 Torch, Head r. 51 Tortoise, Head r. 52 Whip, Head r. 20 Wing, Head r. 137 110 Curly wing, Head r. Small wing, Head r. 106 Wreath, Head r. 40 Wreath with fillet, Head r. "3 PI. LXX, 88, Head r. 32 PL LXX, 90, Head r. 65 PI. LXX, 87, Head r. 31 PI. LXX, 85, Head r. 25 PI. LXX, 84, Head r. 17 PI. LXX, 98, Head r. 129 PI. LXX, 99, Head r. 131 PI. LXX, too, Head r. 135 There are two reverse dies with Horseman r., palm, where the specimens known to me do not permit of the identification of a control-mark above, 3, 173 There are two reverse dies with Horseman r., palm, where the specimens known to me do not permit of the identification of a control-mark below, 62, 128 No control-mark Reverse die Horseman 1., torch, whip 38 Horseman 1., torch, wing 127 Horseman 1., causea, torch, wing 122 Horseman 1., torch, whip, wing 116 Horseman r., palm 149 Numerals . above, Horseman r., palm
113
. between horse and palm, Horseman r., palm . below, Horseman r., causea, palm with fillet . . above, Horseman r., palm 92, : above, Horseman r., palm . . below, Horseman r., palm . above, . below, Horseman r., palm 7, 115,126, ... below, Horseman r., conical cap . above, . . below, Horseman r., palm . . above, . below, Horseman r., palm 31, . above, •: below, Horseman r., palm : •: below, Horseman r., palm • 1 below, Horseman r. 4- below, Horseman r., palm II above, Horseman r., palm 1 • 1 below, Horseman r., conical cap, palm V1 below, Horseman r. X11 below, Horseman r. XV below, Horseman r. X below, Horseman r., palm X XVI below, Horseman r. XVII below, Horseman r. 11 below, Horseman r. 1 below, Horseman r. w above, Horseman r., palm
121
171 119 161
97 160
86 46 123
58 79 51
133 146 29
95 67 68 103 1
70
94 93 155
Letters 81 A below, Horseman r., palm A below, Horseman r., palm with fillet 88 9 above, Horseman r. 106 C below, Horseman r., palm with fillet 132, 164 r\ above, Horseman r., palm 129 3 below, Horseman r., palm 89 3 above, Horseman r., palm 111 F below, Horseman r., palm 170 ^ below, Horseman r., palm 135 JJ above, Horseman r., palm 71 F- below, Horseman r., palm with fillet 99 H above, Horseman r., palm 162 H below, Horseman r., palm 63 H below, Horseman r., whip 56 — above, Horseman r., palm 125 — above, Horseman r., conical cap, palm 148 I below, Horseman r., palm 64 I below, Horseman r., conical cap, palm with fillet 72 •X above, Horseman r., palm 136
876
Types 36 J below, Horseman r. 84 A below, Horseman r., whip 47 J below, Horseman r., palm *47 3- above, Horseman r., palm 100 N below, Horseman r. 91 H below, Horseman r. 20,45 69 A above, Horseman r., palm 1/1 below, Horseman r. 53 118 A below, Horseman r. O above, Horseman r., petasus, palm 174 O below, Horseman r. 85 H below, Horseman r. 14 16 n below, Horseman r., palm O below, Horseman r., palm -< below, Horseman r., palm 166 0 below, Horseman r., conical cap, 82 palm 15 n below, Horseman r. 1 above, Horseman r. 73 Greek double letter and monogram P below, Horseman r., palm with 11 fillet 130, 163 IA above, Horseman r., palm A above, Horseman r., palm 25 1 below, Horseman r., conical cap, palm 59 c below, Horseman r., palm 55 Symbols Anchor below, Horseman r., palm 54 _> below, Horseman r., palm with 109 fillet 52 Arrow above, Horseman r., palm 167 J below, Horseman r., palm 107 Arrow above, Horseman 1., torch 155 Q above, Horseman r., palm 150 : and arrow above, Horseman r., palm 35 R below, Horseman r., palm with fillet 139 Arrow-head above, Horseman r. S above, Horseman r. 110 Arrow-head above, Horseman r., palm 144,168 i/> above, Horseman r., palm 152 oo above, Horseman r., conical cap 131 Arrow-head below, Horseman r., conical cap, palm 4 •3 above, Horseman r., palm 151 •2 above, Horseman r., petasus 165 Bird above, Horseman r., palm with fillet 61 S below, Horseman r., palm with fillet 75, 137 Bird flying above, Horseman 1., whip, wing 77 2 below, Horseman r., palm with 90 Butterfly above, Horseman r., palm fillet 98 with fillet 114 T above, Horseman r., palm 32 —I above, Horseman r., palm 24 Club above, Horseman r., palm Cross above, Horseman r., palm 44 H above, Horseman r., palm 43 37 T below, Horseman r. 48 Cross below, Horseman r., palm T below, Horseman r., palm 13 50 Dagger below, Horseman r., palm V above, Horseman r., palm 57 Dolphin above, Horseman r., conical cap, palm 158 V below, Horseman r. 83 Dolphin below, Horseman r., palm 8 V below, Horseman r., conical cap, palm with fillet 87 Figure-of-eight above, Horseman r., palm 26 < below, Horseman r., palm 40 49 X below, Horseman r. 66 Fish below, Horseman r. 80 Flail above, Horseman r. 141 X below, Horseman r., palm Flail above, Horseman r., palm 28, 153 Fork, three-pronged, 1., above, HorseGreek double letter and monogram man r., palm 169 EN above, Horseman 1., conical cap, Fork, two-pronged, 1., above, torch, wing 142 Horseman r., palm 27 V- above, Horseman r., palm 23 Fork, two-pronged, r., below, Horseman r., palm 42, 108 Letter and numeral Hook above, Horseman r., palm with _:> above, . . below, Horseman, r., fillet 12 palm 145 Leaf below, Horseman r., palm 9 Lituus above, Horseman r., palm 104 Greek letters Lituus above, Horseman r., conical 2 A below, Horseman r., palm cap, palm 101 f above, Horseman, r., palm 78 33 Lizard above, Horseman 1., torch —> above, Horseman r., conical cap 60 Mace above, Horseman r., palm 157
877
Indices Mallet above, Horseman r., palm (PI. LXX, 86) Pedum above, Horseman r., palm Pedum below, Horseman r., palm Rudder below, Horseman 1., torch Spear below, Horseman r., palm Spearhead below, Horseman r. Staff with double hook above, Horseman r., palm Star above, Horseman r., palm Strigil above, Horseman r., palm Strigil below, Horseman r., causea Torch above, Horseman r., palm Torch r. above, Horseman r., whip Torch 1., below, Horseman r., palm Voting-tablet with L above, Horseman r., palm Whip with three thongs above, Horseman r., palm
21
22
65 140
41 102 112
134 154 18
34 39 30 19
5
wing above, Horseman r., conical cap, palm 0 below, Horseman r., Phrygian cap, palm ? below, Horseman r., palm PI. LXX, 82, Horseman r., palm PI. LXX, 83, Horseman r., palm PI. LXX, 89, Horseman r., conical cap PI. LXX, 91, Horseman r., conical cap, palm with fillet PI. LXX, 92, Horseman r., palm with fillet PI. LXX, 93, Horseman r., causea PI. LXX, 94, Horseman r. PI. LXX, 95, Horseman r., palm PI. LXX, 106, Horseman r., causea, palm with fillet PI. LXX, 97, Horseman r., palm PI. LXX, 101, Horseman r., palm
159 17
96 6 10
74 76 105 117 120
124
138 143 172
It emerges with great clarity that the numerous small variants in particular of the reverse type are an extension of the system of control-marks, if one can dignify it with such a name; there are, however, still a number of cases where the same variant and control-mark have more than one die.
878
Legends I I . I N D E X OF L E G E N D S This index is to the catalogue only and the numbers given are those of the catalogue j it covers whole legends and such parts of legends as are separate on the coins; therefore it does not include, for instance, all occurrences of the word Imperator; the index does not cover minor variants or marks of value. At the end I have added a list of legends which are notable for grammatical, orthographical or onomastic reasons, what appear to be engravers' errors being excluded; variations in the nomenclature used on the coinage of the Roman Republic seem to be without much significance (despite the unsupported assertions to the contrary of A. Blanchet, RN 1954> *)• (a) Latin Retrograde inscriptions are at end A, 465 A.A.A.F.F, 480 A.ALB.S.F.335 A.A-BINVSorA.ALBINVS S.F, 335 A.ALLIENVSPRO.COS.457 AC, 428 A.C/4., 174 A.HIRTIVSrR(orAIIIRTIVS PR), 466 A.LICINt, 454 A.LICINIVS.454 A.LICIN (LICINI, LICINIV or LICINIVS) NERVA.454 A.MANLI.A.F.Q, 381 A.AAI/ll.Q.F.SER, 309 A.PLAVTIVS AED.CVR. 431 A.POST.A.F.S.N./VBIN, 372 A.POSTVMIVSCOS.45O A.PV (Argento publico), p. 605
A.SPVU 230 A.XL, 489 A.XLI.489 ACISCVLVS.474 ADFRV.EMV.330 AE.CVR.406 AED.CVR. 356,406 AED.PL.351 AHALA.433 AHENOBAR, 519 AIMILIA REF.S.C419 A/, i n ALBIN (ALBINV or ALBINVS) BRVTI.F.45O, 451 ALEXANDREA or ALEXSANDREA, 419 A/, 136 AN.XV.PR.H.O.C.S.419 N RV7, 221 ANCVS.425 ANCVS MARC I, 346 (and many variants) ANT.AVG.IIIVIR.R.P.C. 544
A7". A/G.IMP.IIIV.R.P.C, 516 ANT. A/GV (or AVG or AVGV or AVGVR) IIIVIR.R.P.C, 536 ANT.IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 521 ANTON.AVG.IMP.III.COS.DES.III. IIIV.R.P.C541.542 ANTON. IMP. 529 ANTONI ARMENIA (or ARMENTA) DEVICTA.543 ANTONI IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 489 ANTONIO AVG, 546 ANTONIVSAVG.IMP.III, 542 ANTONIVS AVGVR COS.DES.ITER. ET TERT—IMP.TERTIO IIIVIR. R.P.C.539 ANTONIVS IMP, 529, 530 A, 298, 353 AP.CL.T.AA_.Q.\*,299 AQVA AAvC, 425 (and variants) A.G (or ARG)PVB,p. 605 ARMENIA (or ARMENTA) DEVICTA, 7T543
A, 192, 344, 394 A/, 136
N RV r ,22i AVG.PONT, 546 AVGVR PONT.MAX, 467 AVGVR PONTIF, 546 AVGVRINI.243 A/C.65 A?, 146 B, 104,477
BACCHIVS IVDAEVS, 431 BA-, 179 BALA, 336 BA.BVS.271 BALBVSPRO.PR.518 BON.EVENT, 416 BROCCHI.IIIVIR, 414
879
Indices BRVT.IMP.508 BRVTVS.433. 500 BRVTVS IMP, 505, 506, 507 BVCA, 480 C, 63, 69, 7*. 107 CZWI.GEM.244
C.^,75 CALLI.BALA.336 C.ANNI (or ANNIVS) T.F.T.N.PRO. COS, 366 C.ArSTI.219 C.ANTIVSC.F,455 C.ANTIVSC.F.RESTIO.455 C.ANTIVS RESTIO.455 C.ANTONIVS M.F.PRO.COS. PONTIFEX.484 C.AVC242 C.CAESARCOS.PONT (orPONT) A/G (or AVG), 490 C.CAESAR COS.TER, 466 C.CAES.DIC.TER.475 C.CAESAR DICT.PERP.PONT.AAX,
CCNtf.F, 240 CCV?.F.TRIG (orTRIGE). 240 C.CV^.TRIGE.223 C.EGNATIVS (or EGNAIVS or EGNA"VS)CN.F.CN.N. MAXSVMVS. 391 CEGA7"V_EI.CF.0,333 CF.L.R.Q.M, 283 C.FABI.C.F. 32a CFLAV.HEMICLEG.PRO.PR, 504 CFONT.29O CFVIsDA or CFVNDAN.Q, 326 CHOSIDI.CF.GETAIIIVIR.407 CHYPSAE.COS.PREIVE.CAPTV.422 (and innumerable variants) C.IVNI.210 CIVNI.CF, 210 CLICINI (or LICINIVS) L.F.MACER. 354
C.LIMEA.36O C.LIMETA(N), 360 CAAIA/I, 203 C M A. or C.MA.L, 335 490 CMALLE.CF, 282 C.CAESAR I I I V I R . R . P . C , 490, 492, 494, C.MAMIL.LIMEAN, 362 CMARC (orAARC)COS,44i,445 518, 523 C.AALCI.CENSO, 346 C.CAESAR IMP, 482,490 CMARI.CF.CAPIT, 378 C.CAESAR IMP.COS.ITER, 457 CMARIDIANVS, 480 C.CAESAR IM.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 495 C.CAESAR IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C.PONT. CMEMMI.CF.427 CMEMMIVS IMPERATOR, 427 A/(G).493 CM"E E or CAA: 1,256 C.CALDVS IMP. A (or A/) X, 437 C.METE or C.METEL or CA^-TELLVS C.CASSEI.IMP, 500,505 or C.A/^TLLVS or CA^-TELL or C.CASSI, 266 9 C.CASSI.IMP, 499, 500, 505 CN/E.BA.B.382 C.CASSI.PR.COS, 498 C.CASSIVS.L.SAUNA", 355 (and many C.NORBA, 491 variants) CNORBANVS, 357,491 C.NVM or NVMITOR or NVMITR or C.CATO, 274 NVMITRI or NVMITORI, 246 C.CENSO (CENSOR, CENSORI or CNVMONIVS VAALA, 514 CENSORIN), 346 CPANSA, 342, 449, 451 C.CLODIVS CF.VESTALIS, 512 C P A N S A C F . C N , 449 CCLOVI.PRAEF.476 C.PASA. 342 C.COEL.CALDVSCOS.437 CPIS.L.F.FRVGI, 408 C.COIL.CALD, 318 CPISOFRVGI.4O8 CCONSIDI.NONIANI.424 CPISOL.F.FR(FRV, FRVG or FRVGI). CCONSIDI.PAETI, 465 408 CCONSIDIVS (CONSIDIVor CPUVTI.278 CONSIDI)PAETI, 465 C.POBLICI.Q.F, 380 CCONSIDIVS PAETVS, 465 CCONSIDIVS (CCONSIDI or C. C.POSTVMI, 394 CPVLCHER, 300 CONSID). 465 CREN0rC.RENI.231 CCOPONIVSPR.444 CROT, 92 CCOSNVS.465 CCOSSVTIVS MARIDIANVS A.A.A. CRRI, 244 F.F,48o C.RVI. 244 880
Legends CEST. 405 CESTIANVS.409 C.S/c,i 7 5 CETEGVS.288 C.S/X.173 CHILO.485 C.SCR, 201 CHORTIS SPECVLATORVM, 544 r C.SERV IL,264 CHORTIVM PRAETORIARVM, 544 CSERflL.CF.423 CILO.302 C.SERNf ILI. 264.370 CINA. 178 C.SERVEILI.M.F.239 CLEMENTIAE CAESARIS. 480 CSV.ei.312 CLEOPAT (or CLEOPATRAE) REGINAE REGVMFILIORVM C.SVEICI.C.F, 312 REGVM, 543 C/^,202 CLOACorCLOACIN,494 C.TARQVITI.P.F.Q, 366 ^SO C~ER.LVC.217 CN.BLASIOCN.F.296 C.TITINI, 226 CN.CA\ i 5 3 CW.CF.228 CN.CO.81 C.W.C.F.FLAC228 CN.CORNEL.L.F.SISENA, 310 CW.FLA.IMPERAT.365 CN.DO, 147 C.Vfc.74 CN.DOM, 147.261 C.VEIBIVS VAARVS.494 CN.DOAfc orCN.DOMI, 261 C.VIBIVS C.F.C.N.PANSA, 449 CN.DOMI or CN.DM1,285 C.VIBIVS (or C.V&IVS) C.F.PANSA, CN.DOMIT.AHENOBARBVSIMP.521 342 (and innumerable variants) CN.DOMITIVS IMP, 519 C.VIBIVS VARVS, 494 CN.DOMITIVSL.F.IMP.519 C.YPSAE.COS.PRIV.CEPIT, 420 C|sf OY..M.CA_.Q.AAi. 284 CA. 100 CN.GELorCN.GELI, 232 C/EICIA/, 321 CN.LEN.345 CAEPIO BRVTVS PRO.COS, 501 CN.LEN.Q.393 CAES.DIC.QVAR.48i CN.LEN" (LENT. LENTV, LENTVLor CAESAR, 320, 443, 452, 458. 468 LEN"VL).345 CAESAR DIC, 488 CN.LEN"VL. 549 C/ES/^DIC.PER,497 CN.UVCR.TRIO. 237 CAESAR DIC.TER, 476 CN.AAG.IMP.471 CAESAR DICT.IN PERPETVO, 480 CN.MAGN.IMP, 470 CAESAR DICT.ITER, 456 CN.MAGNVSIMP.469.470 CAESAR DICT.PERPETVO, 480 CN.MAGN (or MAGNVS) IMP.F, 470 CAESAR DICT.QVART, 480 CN.PISOFRVGI.547 CAESAR DIVIF. 535 CN.PISOPROQ.446 CAESAR IIIVIR.R.P.C. 494. 497 CN.PLANCIVS AED.CVR. 432 CAESAR IM.P.M. 480 CONCORD. 417 CAESAR IMP, 480, 482, 494, 529 CONCORDIA, 415, 429, 494 CAESAR IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 495. 528 CONCORDIAEorCONCORDIAI, CAESAR I M . IIIVIR.R.P.C. 495 436 CAESAR IMP.PONT.IIIVIR.R.P.C, CORDI. 403 517. 528 COS, 434, 437, 44L445 CAESAR IMPER. 480 COS.DESIG.(DESGorDESIGN)ITER. CAESAR PARENS PATRIAE. 480 ETTER (orTERT) IIIVIR.R.P.C, 533 CAESARI DIVI F.546 COS.DIISIG.ITIIR.IIT.TIIRT.IIIVIR. CAISAR, 258 R.P.C.533 CALD. 318 COS.ITER.AESIGN.TERT.IIIVIR. CALDVS (or CA.VS) IIIVIR. 437 R.P.C541 CAPIT, 378 COS.ITER.ETTER.DESIG.537.538.54o CAPITOLINVS.487 COS.ITER.ETTERT.DESIG.538 CARBorCARBO.279 COS.QVINC481 CASCALONGVS.5O7 COS.QVINQ.439 CELSVS.472 881 CERCO. 305 244
Indices COS.TERT.DICT.ITER, 467 COSTA LEG, 506
COTA, 229 CRASS.IVN.LEG.PRO.PR, 460 CRASSIPES or CRASSVPES, 356 D, 171, 467 D.P.P.312 D.S.S.297 D.SILANVSL.F, 337 DA* ,545 DEI PENATES, 455 DEOMI.261 DICT.456 DICT.ITER. 467 DIC.TER.475 DICT. (IN)PERPETVO, 4 8o DIVI F, 526, 534, 535.546 DIVI IVLI. 526 DIVI IVLI.F, 525. 526 DIVOIVL.540 DIVOSIVLIVS.534. 535 DOM.COS.ITER.IMP, 532 DOMIT, 261 DOS (DOSSE, DOSSEN, DOSSENI or DOSSI), 348 E.L.P.337. 340 EID.MAR.508 EPPIVSLEC478 EPPIVSLEG.F.C461 ERVC424 EX A.P. (Ex argento publico), p. 605 EX A.PV. (Ex argento publico), p. 605 EX S.C, 376 and p. 606 F.P.R.513 FABATI.412 "W, 426 FAVSTVS.426 FEELIX (FELIX), 426 FELICITATIS, 473 FIDES, 454 FLAC, 228,387 FLACCI.306 FUAVS.2O7 FLORA.. PRIAVS, 423 FORT.P.R, 440 FOSTLVS, 235 FRVGI.34O F.S,487 G.P.R, 393 G.T.A.46O GAL, 313, 349 GAR.OCV-.NfR, 350
GAR.\£R.OCV..35O GEM, 244, 250 GETAIIIVIR.4O7 GR, 169 GRACCVS.525 GRAGorGRAGV,238 H,8 5 HERCVLESMVSARVM, 410 HIS or HS, 437 HISPAN.372 HO, 403 HONORIS, 473 IC.69 I.S.M.R, 3 i6 IIIVIR.454 IIIVIR. R.P.C, 489, 494, 496,497, 520, 529, 544, cf. COS etc. IIIIVIR, 525 IIIIVIR.A.P.F.494 IIIIVIR.PRI.FL,485 IIIIVIR.Q.D(ESIG), 525 IMP, 429. 459, 471, 477. 479. 482, 489, 494, 496. 499. 500, 506, 507, 529, 530, 546 IMP.A (or N) X.437 IMP.CAESAR DIVI F, 546 IMP.CAESAR DIVI F—COS.ITER.ET TER.DESIG, 537 IMP.CAESAR DIVI F.IIIVIR.ITER. ET TERT. R.P.C—COS.ITER. DESIG, 538 IMP.CAESAR DIVI F.IIIVIR.ITER. R.P.C—COS.ITER. ET TER.DESIG, IMP.CAESAR
DIVI
F.IIIVIR.R.P.C,
IMP.CAESAR DIVI IVLI F, 534 IMP.ITER, 511 IMP.CAESARI —DIVI F.AVG.PONf, 546 IMP.DIVI IVLI F.TER.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 534 IMP.TER, 536 IMP.TERTIOIIIVIR. R.P.C, 539 IMPE.368 IMPER.374 IMPER.ITERV (or ITERVM), 359 IMPERAT, 365 IMPERATOR, 427 IOVIS AXVR.449 IR_, 403 ITER, 456 IVDAEVS,43i IVDEX, 404 IVLI.F, 525. 526 882
Legends \9 KALENL403 I'. 43. 97. 98 L, 408/lb (rev. die 19), 507
L.AEMILIVS BVCA, 480 L.AEMILIVS BVCA IIIIVIR, 480 L.AFSor AAFS.GRAG.238 L.ANTONIVSCOS. 517 L-AILI.NOM.225 L.ATRATINVS AVGVR, 530 L.AXSIVS L.F.NASO.4OO L.BRVTVS PRIM.COS, 506 L.BVCA, 480 L.C.MEMIESL.F.GAL.349 L.C/€SI,298 L.CALDVSVIIV? EP(orEPV-), 437 L.CASSI.C/EICIA/, 321 L.CASSI.Q.F, 386 LCENSOR(CENSORIor CENSORIN), 360, 363 L.CESTIVS.491 U.COIU, 154 L.COSCO.M.F.282 L.COSSVTI.C.F.SABVLA, 395 L.COT, 314 U.CV\2i8 L D, 437 L.FABI.L.F.HISP.Q.366 L.FARSVLELMENSOR.392 L.FLAMIN.CHILOIIIIVIR.PRI.FL.485 L.FLAMINI or L.FLAMNI.CILO, 302 L.FLAMINIVS IIIIVIR, 485 L.FVRI.CN.F.BROCCHI IIIVIR. 414 L.H.V. 31S L.HOSTILIVSSASERN (orSASERNA). 447 U.ITI.2O9 L.IV.1,224 L.IVLI.323 L.IVLI.BVRSIO.352 L.IVLI.L.F.CAESAR. 320 LLENr.C.AARC.COS, 441, 445 L.LENTVLVS C.MARC COS. 445 L.LENTVLVS A/^.COS, 445 L.LIC.CN.DOM, 282 L.LIVINEIVSREGVLVS.494 L.LVCRETI.TRIO, 390 U.MAMIU. 149 L.MANLI.PROQ, 367 L . M A N L H . P R O Q , 367 A A I 33
L.MEMMI, 304 L.A/cMMI.GAL, 313 L.METEL.335 L.MINVCIorMINVCIV,248
L.MVSSIDI (or MVSSIDIVS) LONGI (orLONGVS), 494 L.MVSSIDIVS T.F.LONGVS IIIIVIR. •A.P.F, 494 L.OPEIMI.253 L.P.D.A.P, 338 L.PAPI, 3 84 L.PAPI.CELSVS.472 L.PAPIVS.472 L.PAPIVSCELSVS, 472 L.PAPIVSCELSVSIIIVIR.472 L.PHILIPPVS.293 L.PISO, 340 L.PISO FR/.M, 340 L.PISO FRVG or FRVGI, 340 L.PISO L.F, 340 L.PISO L.F.FRVGI, 340 L.PLAET.CEST, 508 L.PLAETORI L.F.Q, 396 L.PLANC.PR(orPRAEF)V?B(orVRB), 475
L.PLANCVS IMP.ITER, 522 L.PLANCVS PRO.COS, 522 L.PLAVTIV(S) PLANCV(S), 453 eOAA.334 L.POMPON.MOLO, 334 L.POMPONI.C fsf. 282 L.PORCI.LICI.282 L.POST. A.B, 252 L.PROCIU.F.379 L.REGVLVS.494 L.REGVLVS PR, 494 L.REGVLVS IIIIVIR.A.P.F, 494 L.ROSCI.FABATI.412 L.RVBR, 348 L.RVBRI. DOS (DOSSE, DOSSEN, DOSSENIor DOSSI), 348 L.RVSTI.389 L.RVTILI.FLAC, 387 L.SALINA.C.CASSIVS, 355 (and many variants)
L.SA-,317 L.SATVRN, 317 kSAV\204 L.SCIP.ASIAG.3H L.SEAA.PITIO.216 L.SEAAR.flTIO,2i6 L.SENTI.C.F, 325 L.SERVIVS RVFVS, 515 L.SESTI.PRO.Q.502 L.SV_(A)IMPE. 368 L.SVLLA FELI (or FELIX) DIC, 381 L.SVLLA IM (IMP or IMPE), 367 L.SVLLA—IMPER.ITERV (or ITERVM),359 L.MORI, 316
883
Indices L.THORIVS BALBVS or RALBVS, 316 L.TITVRI.L.F.SA>INVS. 344 (and innumerable variants) L.TITVRI.SABIN.344 L.TORQVA.Q.295 L.TORQVAT.IIIVIR, 411 L.1EBA/I or "R ERA/I, 241 L."V?.SAB,344 L.VALERI.FLACCI.306 L.VALERIV(S) ACISCVLVS, 474 L.VINICI. 436 L.tO.L.F.S"RA,377 A S , 298
LABEO.273 LAECA.270 LARISCOLVS,486 L?tRENS,358 LEG, 505, 506 LEG.II—LEG.XXIII, 544 LEG.VIII, 546 LEG.PRI, 544 LEG.XII ANTIQVAE.544 LEG.XVIICLASSICAE.544 LEG.XVIII LYBICAE.544 LEG.F.C461 LEG.PRO.PR. 460 LEIBERTAS, 500. 501. 506 LEN~.CVR.XF(orFL), 393 LEN".A/^.COS,445 LENT.A^.F, 329 LENTVLVSSPINT,5oo LEP, 291 LEP.IMP.489 LEPIDVS POrT.MX.IIIV (or III V?) R.P.C.495
M. AT.IMP, 489 M.ANT.IM.A/G.IIIVIR.R.P.C. M.BARBAT.Q.P, 517 M.ANT.IM.A/G.IIIVIR.R.P.C. L.GELL.Q.P.517 M.ANT.IM.A/G.IIIVIR.R.P.C. M.I\ERVA.PROQ.P, 517 M.ANT (AN~or AT") IM.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 520
M.ANTO.COSIII.IMP.IIII,546 M.AhTO.IMP,488 M.AN"O.IMP.R.P.C,488 M.ANTON.C.CAESAR (IMP), 529 M.AN"ON.COS.IMP,489 M.AN"ON.IMP,488,489 M.ANTON.IMP.AVG.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 522
M.ANTON.IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C. 528 M.ANTON. IMP. IIIVIR.R. P. C.AVG, 528
M.AN"ON.IMP.R.P.C,488 M.ANTONI.IM (or IMP) IIIVIR. R.P.C.496 M.ANTONI.M.F.M.N.AVG.IMP. TERT—COS.ITER.AESIGN.TERT. IIIVIR R.P.C. 541 M.ANTONIOCOS.III.IMP.IIII. 546 M.ANTON I VSAVG.IMP.il II.COS. TERT.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 545 M.ANTONIVS IIIVIR.R.P.C. 492, 494. 496 M.ANTONIVS IMP.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 516. 527 M.ANTONIVS IM(P) IIIVIR.R.P.C. A/G. 493 M.ANTONIVS M.F.F, 541 • v , 144 M.ANTONIVS M.F.M.N.AVGVR LIBERT, 428 IMP.TER—COS.DESIGN. ITER. LIBERAS, 498. 499 ET.TER.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 533 LIBERTAS.433 M.ANTONIVS M.F.M.N.AVGVR. LIBERTATIS.449, 473 IM.TER— IIIVI R.R.P.C.COS. LIBO, 215, 416, 417 DESIG.ITER.ETTERT, 533 H I (=52). 452 M.ANTONIVSMT.M.N.AVGVR LONGIN.413 IMP.Til RT—COS.DIISIG.ITIIR.IIT LONGVS.494, 507 TIIRT.IIIVIR.R.P.C, 533 H?,134 M.AQVINVS LEG, 498. 499 LVGVDVNI.489 M.ARRIVSSECVNDVS.513 M.ATIL (or AT I LI), 214 M. 51, 64, 71, 264, 370 M.ATIL (or ATILI) SARA/, 214 M./WI.GEM, 250 M.A\^I./A.GEM, 250 (and a variety of M.Af.or AV^.RVS. 227 M.AX>ELI.COTA, 229 blundered legends) M.AV^ELI.SCA?I,282 M.ACILI 0rM.ACIL0rM.ACLI, 255 M.BAEBI.Q.F.TAMPIU.236 M.ACILIVSM.F.255 M.BRVTVS IMP, 506 M.AGRIPPACOS.DESIG, 534 M . C A - . Q . A A L . C N ^ O V . , 284 M.ANT.AVGVR IIIVIR.R.P.C, 536 M.CALID.Q.ATt.ClNFL, 284 M.AT.IM.IHV.R.P.C. 531
884
Legends M.CARBO.276 M.CAO.343 M.CAO (or CATO) PRO PR, 462 M.CIPI.M.F.289 M.FABRINI or M.FABRNI or M. FA>RINIorM.FABR, 251 M.FA/.C.F.275 M.FAN.L.CRt (orCRI), 351 M.FOVRI.L.F.HLI, 281 M.hERENNI, 308 M.IVNI.220 M.LEPID.COS.IMP.489 M.LEPID.IMP.489 M.LEPIDVS.419 M.LEPIDVS IIIVIR.R.P.C.492,494 M.LVCILI.RVF. 324 MA^C 45 M.AAV.CI.AA/.For AAf, 245 M.A/c.TELLV(S)orM.AA;TLLVS,263 M.METELLVSQ.F, 263,369 M.METTI (orMETTIVS). 480 M.MINAT.SABI (or SABIN) PR.Q, 470 M.OPEIMI.254 M.PISOM.F.FRVGI.418 M.PLAETOR(PLAETORI, PLAETORIVorPLAETORIVS) CEST.405 M.PLAETORIVSAED.CVR— CESTIANVS.4O9 M.PLAETORIVS M.F.AED.CVR— CESTIANVS, 409 M.POBLICI.LEG.PRO PR, 469 M.POR(C) LAECA.27O M.RORC.LAECA.27O M.SCAVR.AED.CVR.422 (and variants) M.SERGI.SILVSQ.286 M.SERVEILI.C.F.327 M.SERVILIVSLEG.505 M.SIA.285 M.SILA.285 M.SILANVS AVG.Q.PRO.COS, 542 M.TITINI, 150 M.TVLLL280 M.\A,G or M.NA.GV or M.VARG or M.Vk, 257 M.VOLTEIM.F, 3 85 M , 64, 143 AA, 64, 172 A & , 143' AA/.ACIor AA/.ACIL, 271 AA/.ACILI.BA_BVS,27i AA/.ACILIVS IIIVIR.442 AA/.AEMILIOLEP.291 AA/.AQVIL.3O3 AA/.AQVIL.AA/.F.AA/.N.IIIVIR, 401
AA/.CORDI (orCORDIVS) RVF (RVFI, RVFV orRVFVS), 463 AA/.CORDI (CORDIV or CORDIVS) RVFVS IIIVIR. 463 AA/.FONT, 353 AA/.FOrT.TR.MIL, 429 AA/.FOrTEI,3O7 AA/.FON"EI.C.F,353 MACER, 354. 480 AAG (or MAG) PIVS IMP.ITER, 511 MAGN.PROCOS, 446,447 AAGN (AAGN VS or AAGN V) PIVS IMP,
479 AAGNVS (MAGNVS, MAGNV or MAGN)PIVS IMP.F, 478 MAGNVS PROCOS.402 MARC.COS, 445 A^.COS, 445 MARCELLINVS.439 MARCELLINVS COS.QVINQ.439 MARIDIANVS,48o 'AA, 162 MAXSVMVS, 391 AA), 142 Afc , 132 MEMMIVS AED.CERIALIA PREIMVS FECIT, 427 MENSOR, 392 MESSA..F.435 METEL.PIVS SCIP.IMP.460 MONETA, 396, 464 M,93 AA, 103, * 6 2 AA, 103 MVRCVS IMP,5io AA4ENA, 186 MVSA, 410
M.94 N.FABI.PICTOR, 268 NASO, 400 NAT, 200 NATA, 208 NEPT.519 NEPTVNI.483 N£RI.Q.VB, 441 NERVA.454 NERVA IIIVIR, 454 NOM. 225 NVMA.446 NVAA POAA1IL,334 NVMA POMPILI. 346 (and many variants) OCV_.VrR.GAR,350
885
Indice OPEI, 190 O/W. 188 OSCA.532 n, 97.99 l\ 292, 335, 337 P (Publice), p. 605 P. A (Publico argento), p. 605 P.ACCOLEIVS LARISCOLVS, 486 A\ 176 P.BLAS, 189 P.CALP.247 P.CLODIVSM.F.494 P.CLODIVSM.F.IIIIVIR.A.P.F,494 P.CRASSVS IVN.LEG.PRO PR, 460 P.CRASSVSM. F.43O P.CREPVS,36o P.CREPVSI, 360,361 P.E.S.C329 P.FONTEIVS (or FONTEIVS) CAPITO IIIV1R, 429 P.FOVRIVSCRASSIPES (or CRASSVPES) AED.CVR.356 P.GALB.AE (or AED)CVR,4o6 P.HYPSAE.AED.CVR, 422 (and innumerable variants) P.L/ECA, 301 P.LEN\P.F.L.N.Q,397 P.A&, 138 P.A^c.AT, 249 P.A/£..A7".AA- , 249
(and
a variety of
blundered legends) P.INERVA.292 P.P. 307 P.PAETVS.233 P.SABIN.Q.331 P.SATRIENVS.388 P.SEPVLLIVS,48o P.SEPVLLIVSMACER,48o P.SERVILI.M.F.RVLLI.328 P.SY-A(orSVUA), 205 P.VEhTIDI.PONT.IMP, 531 P.YPSAE.42O PAETIorPAETVS,465 PALIKANIorPALIKANVS,473 PANSA, 342, 449 PATE COS, 435 PAVLLVS LEPIDVS.415, 417 PAVL.LVS.415 PAXS.48O PETILLIVS CAPITOLINVS.487 HLI.281 PHILIPPVS.425 PICTOR.268 PIEASorPIETAS,3o8, 450. 477 PIEAS(orPIETAS)COS,5i6
PISO, 340 PISO CAEPIOQ.33O PISO FRVGI, 340 PITIO.216 PIVS.459 PIVS IMP, 479 PIVS IMP.F, 478 PLANCVorPLANCVS,453 PON 1.MAX. 419 POIST.IMP, 531 PONT.MAX, 467 PONTIF.AVGVR.546 PONTIFEX.484 POPVL.IVSSV, 518 PR, 444, 491, 494 PRAEF.476 PR/EF.CLAS. ET OR/E WL I "E X S.C. 511
PR/EF.CLAS.ETOR/EA/^IT(EX)S.C. PR/EF.OR/E A ^ l "ET CLAS.S.C.511 PR/EF.OR/E AA.IT.ET CLAS. (EX) S.C. 511 PR.VRB.475 PRAEF.VR.494 PRAEF.^B.475 PRI.FL, 485
PR(O)COS, 402, 446, 498 PROPR, 518 PR(O)Q, 470, 502 PROVOCO. 301 T.177 PV (Publice), p. 605 W.155 P\A or PVR, 187 PVTEAL.SCRIBON, 416. 417 Q, 86, 102, 375 Q.A7"O.BA_B.PR,364 Q.C.M.P.I, 374 Q.CAEP (or CAEPIO) BRVT (or BRVTVS) IMP, 503, 505 Q.CAEPIO BRVTVS PRO COS. 502 Q.CASSIVS.428 Q.CORNVFICI.AVGVR IMP, 509 Q.CREPER.M.F.ROCVS, 399 Q.CREPEREI.ROCVS, 399 Q.CVRTorQ.CVRTI,285 Q.DESIG.525 Q.FAB(FABh, 273 Q.FABI.LABEO, 273 QLC125 Q.LABIENVS PARTHICVS IMP. 524 Q.LVATI.3O5 Q.LN7"ATI .Q—CERCO, 305
886
Legends Q.A^.C.F.L.R, 283 Q.AARC.LIBO.215 Q.MARI, 148 Q.AAX.371 Q.AAX or Q.MAX or Q.M/X.. 265 , 211
Q.ATt.CN1. L.M.CALID, 284 Q.M~E orQ.ATtor Q.METorQ.AfcT, 256 Q.A/'c'E or Q.MET
or Q.AAiTE or
Q.M.Tl-,256 Q.METEL.PIVS SCIPIO IMP, 459, 460 Q.METELL.SCIPIOIMP.461 Q.MINV.RVF.277 Q.MX, 265 Q.NASIDIV(S), 483 Q.OPPIVSPR. 550 Q.PIUPVS.259 Q.POM.RVFI.434 Q.POMPEI.Q.F.RVFVS (or RVRVS) COS, 434 Q.POMPEI.RVF.434 Q.POMPONI.MVSA,4io Q.POMPONI.RVFVS.398 Q.SALVIVS IMP.COS.DESG (or DESIG). 523 Q.SICINIVS IIIVIR, 440, 444 Q . H RM.AA-, 319 Q.TITI.341 QVAR.481 Q.VOCONIVS VITVLVS, 526 Q.VOCONIVS VITVLVS Q.DESIG (or DESIGN), 526 QVIRIN.268 QVIRINVS.427
ROMANO, 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23 ROMANOM, 3,4 ROMAO, 17 ROMNAO, 17 RVF, 277, 324, 463 RVFIorRVFV,463 RVFVS.398, 463, 515 RVFVSCOS.434 R V F V S I I I V I R , 463 RVLLI.328 RVS, 227 S. 437 S.C.p. 606 S.C.D.T.385 S F,487 S.V.isi SAB, 344 SABIN.344 SABINVS, 344.404 SABVLA.395 SAFRA, 206 SA.,477 SAL, 477 SA.VSorSALVS.337 SALVTIS.442 SARorS/^, 199 SARA/. 214 SASERN(A), 447 SA. 180 SCARPVS IMP, 546
SCA4I.282
SCIP.IMP.460 SCIPIO IMP, 459, 461 SECVNDVS, 513 SER.3O9 SER.SV.P.438 R.335 SEX.IV_I.CAISAR,2 5 8 REGVLVS.494 SEX.MAGN.PIVS IMP, 477 REGVLVS F.PRAEF.VR, 494 SEX.MAGN (or MAGNVS) IMP, 477 REGVLVSPR.494 SEX.NONI.PR.L.V.P.F,42i RESTIO.455 SEX.PO or POM or PMO, 235 REX ARETAS.422 SIBVLLAorSIBYLLA, 411 RO, 403 SICIL.401 ROCVS.399 SILVS, 286 R&.84 ROMA, 25-34, 37-39, 41-224, 226-296, SISENA, 310 301-303, 305, 308-310, 312-313, 315- SORS, 405 317. 322, 329, 333-335. 337. 339-340, ST, 343 342-343, 346, 350, 369-371. 373. 38o, SVFENAS, 421 SVLLACOS.434 388, 462. 464 SX.Q. 152 ROMAAC, 17 ROMAAN, 17 T, 98, 141 ROMAAO, 17 T. C A (CAR, CARIS.CARISI, CARISIV ROMAAOC, 17 orCARISIVS), 464 ROMAMO, 17 T.CARISIV (or CARISIVS) IIIVIR, 464 ROMANC, 17
887
Indices TRIVMPVS.472 T . 177 TV? D, 193 TVSCVL, 5 i5 TVTOR REG.S.C419
T.CLOVL.1,260 T.CLOV.I.Q.332 T.DEIDI, 294 T.DIDI.IMP.VIL.PVB.429 T.AA..AP.CL.Q.V?,299 T.Q. 267 T.QVINCTL548 T.VETTIVSSABINVS.4O4 A, 192, 344.394. 404 A/, 161 ^^. *33 TAMPIU.236 TER.415 TI.AVGVRINI.243
V, 87, 408/ia (obv. die 33), 413 VAALA.514 VAARVS.494 W , 191 VALEV. 442 V&, 126
TI.CLM.TI.F.rt .N,383
TI.MINVCI.C.F.AVGVRINI, 243 TI.Q.297 TI.SEMPRON.GRACCVSIIIIVIR .Q.D (orDESIG), 525 Q. TI.SEMPRONIVS GRACCVS DESIC525 TI.V/,234 TI.NFR.234 TI.ViVR.234 TOD, 141 TRIGorTRIGE, 223. 240 TRIO, 237, 390
V^O, 185 VARROPROQ.446 VARVS.494 V?,95 V r R.OCV..GAR,' 3 5o VEST or VESTA, 428 VESTALIS,5i2 VIClIX, 343,462 VIL.PVB.429 VIL403 VIRTVS.4O1 VITVLVS.526 VNI.373
Retrograde inscriptions
9A8.V.J.344
ITIT.Q.341
DOMAOfl. 17 MAMOa,i7 (b) Greek
A, 101 £, 101
PQMAIQN, 1
(c) Notable Legends A. Alb(inus) S.f. Ad fru(mentum) emu(ndum) Aid(ilis) Cur(ulis), 422 Aimilia (Basilica) ref(ecta) Albinus Bruti f. Alexandrea Alexsandrea C. Cassei C. Coil(ius) Cald(us) C. Cur(iatius) f. (Trigeminus) C. Malle(olus) C.f. C. Pansa C.f.C.n. C. Pasa CVeibius (Vaarus) C.Ypsae(us) Caeician(us)
Caisar Cetegus Chortis Cilo Cina Cn. Dome(itius) Cn. Magnus Imp.f. Concordiai Cos. diisig. etc. Cos. iter(um) design(atus) tertio (Greek A) Cos. quinc(uies) Cota Crassupes D. Silanus L. f. Deomi(tius) Divos Iulius
888
\
Legends Eid(ibus) Mar(tiis) Feelix Flaus Fostlus Graccus Gragu(lus) Imp. Divi luli f. ter(tio) Iovius Axur(is) L. C. Memies L. Coil(ius) L. Piso. Fru(gi) n. L. Procili(us) f. Lariscolus (long i) Leibertas M. Anto(nius) Imp. R. P. C. M. Antonius M.f.f. M. Calidius (long i) M. Fouri M. Metellus Q.f. M. Piso M.f. Frugi Maxsumus Memmius Aed(ilis) Cerialia preimus fecit
Ocul(nius) Opei(mius) Opeimi(us) P. Crassus M.f. P. Lent(ulus) P.f.L.n. P. Mae(nius) Ant(iaticus) M.f. Paullus Paxs Preiver(num), 422 Q. Pilipus Q. Salvius Q. Therm(us) M.f. Quireinus, 427 Romanom, Romano (sing. nom. Sisena Sx. Q. T. Clouli(us), bis T. Deidi(us) Triumpus Vaala Vaarus
Indices III. INDEX OF SOURCES The numbers given are page numbers. l. Papyri P. Osl. ii, 14, line 9 P. Oxy. 1411 P. Tebt. 33 W . Chrest. 3
740 561 315 315
2. Inscriptions AE 1933, 99 1934, 258 1939. 119 1967, 107 1968, 474 1968, 536-8 Annuario Atene 1961-2, pp. 317-18, no. 170 BCH 1904, 271 1964, 569 and 607 1965, 302 Bull. Epig. 1950, 68 1964, 573 Chiron 1971, 167 CIL i2, p. 214 p. 245 2806 ii, 4962 iii, 846 6076 14386c! iv, 3340, cliv vi, 791 1145 1518 8455 8456 8463 9953 ix, 705 4673 5904 x, 16 5689 6493 xi, 3310a 3311 xiv, 2862 3642 Corp. Inscr. Sem. 336 Corinth viii, 3, 125 EE ix, 599 FIRA, i, no. 7 no. 8 no. 10
521 521 521
494 599 521 521 196
544 544 725 521
544 373 373
735
/. Cret. iv, 327 521 IG ii-iii2, 1469 693 1471 693 v, 2, 146 268 xii, 9, 233 544 916 538 Inscr. Del. 1433 A (Col. i), line 141 632 1449 Aab (Col. ii), line 12 632 1450 A, line 97 632 Inscr. It. xiii, 1, p. 183 494 1. P- 565 83 1, p. 568 101, 742 290 2, pp. 439-40 3, no. 69 626 3, no. 70 313,599) 709 ILLRP 8 225 721 55 101-10 418 126 396, 727 170 323 187 715 192 3H>363 224 374 265 311
591
346
449 599
35i 352-6
511 561 617
363 365 366
579 599
392 407-8 409 411 414 417 421 429 431
617 617
579 617
447 311
736 725 561 264 521 521 418 617
439
735 599 497
504 515 517 518 562a 567-8
71, 259, 313, 632 313, 632 313
890
461
464 465 465a
475 485
387 387 397 326 403 81 441
494 742 442
474 481
349 534 743 519 294 632 632 632 320 328 632 248, 313 629 632
743 442
Sources 688 767 Vetter 2 233
ILLRP (com.) 674 777 807 987-8 994-5 997-8 1019 1025 1034 1104 1110 1113 1116 1120 1148 1260 /LS73 73a
632 325 366
108 251
510
310 310 310 412
483 396 739 743 743 742 743 377 293 742 742
27 SIG 617 674
718 440 723 723 719
439 471 605 629 388 78 452 374 388
275 340 352
521
410
629
472 579 578, 582 579 579 578 579 455 735f623 591 349 521. 739 736 515
415 418
629 629 629 335
886
16 18 19
271
632 632
450 743
904
1570 1634-5 1635 1636-7 1636 1638 1639 4999 6631 8302 8629-35 8890 8891 9349 9460 G. Marini, Gli atti e monumenti de'fratelli arvali, 61-2 OGIS 480 Praktika 1953, 271 REA 1964, 309 RN 1935, 1 Seconda misc. Greca e Romana, 381 SEG iii, 451 ix, 152 Sherk 4 9 10, B
3. Greek authors Aelian, NA, i, 38 xi, 16 Agathocles, FGH 472, fr. 5 = 840, frr. 18-19 Alcimus, FGH 560, fr. 4 = 840, fr. 12 Antiochus, FGH 555, fr. 5 Apollodorus, Bibl. i, 3, 1 ii, 7, 8 Appian, BC i, 131 188 253
617, 624 538
422
431 439 451 453-5 464 474-5 549 ii, 92 129
135 164 197 281
264 627 723 544 80
494 240, 262
284 319 421
424 430 442 443
521
602
262 624 624 363 387 328 447, 483. 517 196 617, 624
iii, 39
240, 617, 617, 293.
891
60
72 105-7 197 259 269 iv, 18 19
81
397 373 446 637-8 705 696 696 608, 639 639 92, 389 735 451 451, 735 639 735 735, 739 494 495 495 617 510 510
741 92
639 640
639 640
Indices Appian, BC, iv (amt.)
XX2UX, 1 6 , 2
107
412
132-46
640 470 419 470 741 639 741 519 636 526 516
167 171 181
300-5 316 563
v,8
17-18
120 207 208 282
416 463 540
Celt. 6 Mith. 84 131 152 217 226
259 430 478 565
569-70 582
Aristotle, Pol. 1308a 35 Rhet. i, 4 FGH 840, fr. 13a 13c
Athenaeus, vi, 108 xii, 534e xv, 202a 692d-e Callias, FGH 564, fr. 5 = 840, fr. 14 Callimachus, Epigr. 56 Pfeiffer Cephalon, FGH 45, frr. 8-10 = 840, fr. 21, cf. fr. 40b Clinias, FGH 819, fr. 1 Damastes, FGH 5, fr. 3 = 840, fr. 9 Dio see also Zonaras fr. 5. 5-6 xxx-xxxv, fr. 100B fr. 104 xxxvii, 8, 2 21,2 21,3 21,4 xxxviii, 1, 5 5. * 5.2
17.5
19.3 *1, 45. 4-5 xli, 3, 4 6,3 9,7
17,1-2 39,2 xlii, 18, 3 50
xliii, 14, 5 14,6 21,2 22, 1 22,2 43>3 44,2 45,2 47,4 48, 1 48,3 xliv, 4, 2
100
640 739 476 640 727 637 697 637 637 697 637 638 451 638 638 83
4,4 4,5 5,2 6,3 6,4
11,2 48,1 48,3 xlv, 2, 3
622
617 723 723 624 369 735 719 723 718 723 723 723
3.2 6,4 6,5 7,1 7,2
17,1 17,3 xlvi, 31, 3 38,1 xlvii, 10, 6 14,2 16-17 21,3 25
452 262
637 135 450 83 450 638 638 638 7*4
892
25,2 33,3 40, 8 42, 3-43. 1 xlviii, 5, 4 19,1 19,2 26,5 3L5 34
48,5
455 609 456 608, 639 608, 639 639 639 510 373, 45O 639 478 742 742 735 735 727 494 619 639 619 619 494 493, 494 494 510 741 495 488 494 494 725 617 495 741 744 741 349
7H 639 740 419 640 640 639 741 741 741 741 741 742 521 739 529 739 640 739
Sources Dio (cont.) xlix, 15, 3 640 541 1,7,1 10,4 640 728 li, 3. 5 499 19,3 22,5 554 li», 13, 3 314 13,6 314 32,4 523 liv, 26, 6 599 639 lv, 25, 5 623 Ivi, 10 289 lxvii, 10, l Diodorus vii, 5, 8 735 xxxv, 25 636, 697 327 xxxvi, 13 616 xxxvii, 10 637 xxxviii-xxxix, fr. 7 xxxviii-xxxix, fr. 14 637 Dionysius, FGH 840, frr.'io-n 723 D. Hal. i, 18, 2 719 34, 1 719 34,5 719 719 35,3 482 59, 4-5 716 67, 4 (Timaeus) 320 68,2 70,4 735 79,8 267, 714 274 iii, 62 623 iv, 16, 2 17,2 625 220 45,1 vi, 13 715 13,1-4 335 326 94,3 vii, 71, 2 615, 623, 627 xii, 4, 2-5 275 273 4,6 xx, 17 (20, 9) 43 Eratosthenes, FGH 241, fr. 45 = 840, fr. 20 723 Eustathius on Homer, Od. v, 249 719 Galen, de pond. 7 595 13 595 Galitas, FGH 818, fr. 1 723 Hellanicus, FGH 4, fr. 84 = 840, fr. 8 722 fr. 111 719 Heraclides Lembos, FGH 840, fr. 13b 723 fr. 40d 723 Hesiod, Erga 109-20 719 166-73 719 Theog. 285-6 716 Josephus, Ant. xiv, 3, 2 454 34-6 454
80-1 228 232
234 236 240
BJ i, 159 Lycophron, Alexandra, 1232-4 Melinno, Hymn to Rome 1 Nic. Dam., Cues. 55 80 110
Orac. Sibyll. xi, 215 xi, 290 Pausanias ix, 7, 4 40,7 Plutarch, Mor. 20ia-b 3i4d defort. Rom. 3i8c-d 320d praec. rei p. get. 8o6d QR 268f 272e-273b 274e-f 276f 278d Ale. 16 Ant. 4 9 16 36
893
447 89 89 89 89 89 447 714 722 617 494 639 740 740 637 373 636 485 373 268 • 45° 268 727 719 312
268 369 510
740 741
60
510 510
73-4 Brut. 1 24 25 30 34 39 40
499 456 741 639 741 741 741 741
51
C. Gr. 5 8 11
Caes. 8 21
28
35 48 57 Cato Maior 4 10
Cato Minor 18 26
Cic. 17 31
516
636, 697 75 75 638 639 696 639 735 495 621
623 633 638 409 714
Indices Plutarch {com.) Cor. 1 3 Crass. 2 6 4 7 22 F/aw. 13 16
12
Luc. 2 4 13 Afar, io 17 27 30 32 36 38 Marc. 10 Nutna 9 13 21 22
Otho 4 Pan/. 25 31.2 31. 5-6 38 Pob. 11 13 Pomp. 1 4 13 14 25 45 52 55 62 68 80 Pyrrh. 11 Rom. 2 4. 1 12
Sen. 4 7 5M//. 2, 1 3 6 9 12 19
22-3 361 715 630 454 627 630 33
25
29 30
35 41
Comp. Lys. et Sull. 3 Ti. Gr. 6
291
13
630 725
Polyaenus viii, 23, 5 23,31 Polybius i, 1, 5-6 16,9 20, 8 and 13 40, 6-16 58,9 59.6 62,9 63.4 ii, 12, 3
80, 697 637 638 450 327 730 630 450 452 623 630 305 266 333 738
15,1 23. 11
vi, 12, 8 13. 1 19. 1 19.3
721
22,3
23,15 24,6 39.12 39, 15 53-5 53. 7-8 58, 5 ix, 42, 5-8 x, 5, 5
715 289 289 635 624 715
451. 637 637 83 735 638
450, 695. 707 456, 696 696 639
451. 736 743 285
510, 723 268 740 629 386 250
450 450
450, 493
19 19,
1-2
637 637 388,398, 454 454 450 637 638 633 624 735 397 721
634 41
287 634 634 634 634 634 624 46 616 616 71
625 449 623 522
624 697 730 522
624, 630 460 310
33 33 696 33 714
19,2 xi, 3 xii, 4b (Timaeus) 722 4b, 1 (Timaeus) xviii, 35, 4 631, 635 263 xxi, 18, 1 37,5-6 327 xxiii, 14, 5 313, 617 14,8 633 623 xxxi, 28, 5-6 Strabo xiv, 2, 26 529 Suidas, s.v. Movr|Ta 41 Timaeus, see D. Hal. and Polybius 713 Xenagoras, FGH 240, fr. 29 = 840, fr. 17 723 Zonaras vii, 9, 11 335 634 viii, 16
637
373. 637
894
26, 14
569
Sources 4. Latin authors Aetna 603 Carmen de ponderibus 62 de vir. ill. 7, 9-14 16 16, 2 Laus Pis. 3 15
origo gent. Rom. 1, 3 3, 1 3,4 12,5 20, 4 Anthsl. Lat. 197, 17 Riese Cor/>. G/OSJ. Lat. iv, 57, 23
318 591 335 715 335 738 738 719 719
719 320
268 720
335 Ammianus Marcellinus xxix, 2, 18 735 Arnobius iii, 40 369 707 Asconius 8C 17C 74 28C 456, 461, 493 456 33C 65C 77 68C 636, 697 616 68-69C 638 73C 78C 452 Ps.-Asconius 2i7St 615, 623, 627 247St 623 Caesar, BC i, 4, 2 409 608, 639 6,3 639 6,8 639 14, 1 22, 3-6 735 465 22,5 639, 696 23,4 639 33,3 ii, 44 459 639 iii, 3, 2 89 4, 1 639 32,5 83 735 98,2 735 247 BG iii, 7, 3 10,2 247 BAfr. 83, 1 735f720 Cassiodorus, Var. iii, 51, 6 H/6 anno 158 74 719 Cassius Hemina, fr. lP Cato, Origines, frr. 8-1 lP 715 621 Agr.y 14, 3 621 14,5 629 15,1 621 21,5 621 22, 3-4 106 613 621 144,3
144,5 145,2 Celsus, ad Pulliam Natalem de medicina v, 17, 1 Censorinus 18, 11 Cicero, ad Att. i. 14, 5 18,6 18,7 19,4 ii, 6, 2 7,2 12,2 16, 1-2 17, 1 18, 2 24, 2-3 iii, 17, 1 24, 1 iv, 11, 1 15,4 15,6 16, 2 16, 5 17,2 18,3 v, 14, 1 20, 8 vi, 1, 25 7,2
vii, 3, 3 12, 2 21,2 viii, 9, 4 ix, 7C, 1 x, 4, 8 8,6 13, 1 ii,5 14, 1 xi, 2, 3 3,3 6,3 xii, 12, 2 17
xiii, 40, 1 42,3 xiv, 14, 1 14, 5-7 17,3 18, 1
19,3 22, 1 xv, 3, 2 xvi, 14, 4 ad Brut, i, 6, 4
895
11, 1
621 621
594 594 511
440, 609 450 609 638 618
374 374 638 638 638 456 510
617 633 396 453 72
396 374 456 695 418 639 633 714 639 639 466 735 639, 735 639 740 547 639 639 639 92
93 391 456 510
495 639 495 639 495 495 741 639 516 639
Indices Cicero, ad Brut, (cont.) 17.3 18,5 ii»3>5
516 639 639
ad Caes. tun. i, 7
510
85
640 609
Font. 1
fr.s jam. i, 4,1 vii, 13, 2 24,1 viii, 6, 3 ix, 18,4 21,3 xi, 10, 5 24,2 28, 2 xii, 3,1 25,1 30,4 xiii, 7 29,4 xiii, 60, 1 xv, 4, 2 20, 1
adQ.fr. ii, 3,1 6 (5), 1 7 (6), 1 14 (13). 5 iii, 4, 1 6 (8), 4 6 (8), 6 7 (9), 3 Balb. 9 16 61 Gael. 34 Cluent. 94 127 135 140 148 152 165 182 de domo 23 41 50 52 144 de har. resp. 60
de imp. Pomp. 4 14 45 de leg. agr. ii, 10 19 35 47
80 de prov. cons. 11 div. in Caec. 63 Flac. 80
1-5
599
2
304 609
5
483 295 640, 697 608, 640
19 in Cat. i, 2 4 ii, 13 iii, 6
9
735 494 714 639 94 89
10 iv, 15 in Pis. 61
86 in Vat. 5
25 29
510
441, 695
441
in Verr.1, 85 in Verr.2, i, 3 6
609
108
638 396 456 456 456 456 456
i>, 5 iii, 12 81
450 450
181 182 v, 5 2 114 141-2 161-2
163 164 168 173
639 521
638 412
406 72 602
441 408 403 638, 707 616 616 618
Lig.7 Mur. 15 Phil, i, 17 24
744 639 638 638
ii, 2 6
31
35 85 87 92-3
93 116 iii, 3 0 v, 11
460
15
638
53
329
vii, 1
638 638
10 ix, 12
896
637 639 270,299 635 414 418 637 633 361 629 720 720 727 409 727 441 633 696 633 441 633 299 697 561 637 636 638 705 705 414 705 561 638 705 414 632 314 92, 494 237 639 639 456 494 639 488 492 639 635 495 639 639 639 640 617 640 459
Sources Cicero, Phil, {com.) x, 24 xii, 27 xiii, 22 25 32 50 xiv, 28 Plane. 19 51
58 Rab. perd. 11 Rab. Post. 45 Rose. Am. 64 Rose. Com. 28 Sest. 55 66 74 103 129
Brutus 62 81 135
159-60 178 180
269 331 de or. i, 40 121
ii, 88 170 223
acad. pr. ii, 84 de amic. 39 101
de div. i, 34 ii, 85 98
defin. ii, 63 de leg. ii, 14 24 31 42
iii, 6 38 41 42 de off. i, 33 ",47 49 72
74 76 78-84 iii, 61-4
639 387 494. 740 494 639 739 740 728 372 602
523 623 285 623
695, 707 496, 599 609 636 450 441 292, 294 281, 316 71-2 3O2f. 366 447 456 72 72 72 72 72 271
75 72 418 418 740 323 616 440 616 714 599 307 617 77 294 72 72
636 635 635 441 719
73 80 91 de re p. ii, 26 40
55 iii, 17 iv, 7 vi, 10-29 ND i, 82 ii, 6 51 iii, 11 61-4 Tusc. disp. iii, 48 [Cicero], ad Herennium i, 21 Schol. Bob. 90 St 132 St 149 St 157 St [Q. Cicero], Comm. Pet. 11 Columella v, 1,12 Cornelius Nepos, Alt. 18, 3 Donatus Vit. Verg. 13 Ennius, Ann. 25V 117V 122-4V Euhem. 5V Scaenica 67J 381J var. 6-8V Eutropius iv, 22 23 Festus 508L Festus, s.v. Apollinares ludi Caeculus Centenariae Corniscarum Dispensatores Grave aes Infra classem Mamiliorum familia Mamuri veturi Minucia Minotauri Minucia Porta Nancitor Non omnibus dormio Oscines aves Porci effigies Praefecturae Ratitum quadrantem Ratumenna porta Sestertius Sesterti not[am] Sextantari asses
897
603 620
561 634 625 494 623 634 730 396 715 511
715, 721 719 636 636 631 707 441 636 602
591 456 623 719 452 447 719 164 164 725 299 71
623 402
288 624 519 590 37, 612 631 220
266 274 718 274 621
304 739 718 602
717, 744 715 613 613 30, 611
Indices Festus (com.) Todi Tributorum conlationem Trientem tertium Florus i, 5 (i, 11), 2-3 5(i, ii)» 4 28 (ii, 14), 14 38 (iii, 3), 19 38 (iii, 3), 19-21 ii, 1 (iii, 13), 6 5 ("i, 17), 3
215 33
4,5 9 ii,5-9
622
16
335
21,4 24,1
715 721
iii, 2, 1
715 388 286
6,5
222
24,4-9 26,13 33,9 43, 1 43,7 45. 1 45,3 45> 4 49,9 53,3 55,8 ii, 12-13, 5
Gaius ii, 252 274
623 623
20, 12 41, 10
iii, 42
623, 631
223
623 623 623
335 721
633, 636 633 639 494
13 (iv, 2), 21
17 (iv, 7), l Frontinus, Aq. i, 7 Strat. i, 11, 8
306, 449, 624, 699
1 1 , 11
iv, 14 95
Gellius i, 12, 16 ii, 10, 3
250
599
24,2
624
24,3 24,7
624 624 470
24, 13 v, 12, 11
vi, 11,9 vi (vii), 13, 1 xi, 1, 2 xiii, 12, 6 23
xvi, 10, 8 10, 10
xviii, 4, 4 13,3 XX, 1, 12
Horace, AP 291-2 Epod. 9, 7-8 Od. iii, 27, 2-3 Sat. i, 4, 93 10,25
Hyginus 80 123
157
254,4 274, 19 Isidorus, Etymologiae xviii, 36, 1 Lactantius, Inst. Div. i, 13, 6-7 Licinianus 34-5 Bonn 38-9 Bonn Livy i, 3, 10-4, 7
312
624 631 624 314 265 623 625 638 623 623 738 739 482 498 498 357 591 445 318 725 720
719 637
83, 735 267
42,5 iv, 16, 2 16, 2-4 30,3 v, 46, 1-3 viii, 11, 16 x, 23 23, 11-12 23, 12 29, 14
46, 15 47,3 xxi, 16, 3-6 41,6 xxii, 10, 7 23,6 23, 6-8 37, 12
38, 1-5 52,2
54,2 58,4 59,18 xxiii, 15, 15 21,4 21,5 31, 1-2
38, 12 48, 4-8 48,9 48,9-49, 4 xxiv, 11, 7 11, 7-8 n,7-9 18, 2 18,
10-11
268 355 355 451 744 260 715 260 361 623 625 497 335 389 220 626 626 413 715 326 715 274, 621 273 590, 621 727 630 714 267 715 715 621 714 43 630 615, 627 630 616 352 715 630 630 630 630 630 604 33 33 33 33 43 33 623 627 33 33 33
Sources Livy (com.) 18,12 18, 13-14 18,15 46,6 xxv, 7, 5 12, 15 12,14 13. 8-11 xxvi, 14, 8 23,3
33 33 33
xxvii, 10, 11 10, 11-13 11, 8 12,1 16,7 36, 12 49.6 xxviii, 9, 16 9.17
33, 602 361, 469 402
33 33
344 33 33 34 33. 604,
xxix, 10, 4-11, 8 14, 5-14 15,9 16, 1-3 xxxi, 13, 2-9 13,7 20,7 49.2 xxxii, 2, 1-2 7.3
33
17.2
xxxiii, 23, 7 27.3 42,3 xxxiv, 50, 6 52,6 xxxv, 9, 6 xxxvi, 30, 3 40, 13 xxxvii, 33, 2-3 50,8 51, 1-6 52,1 xxxvii, 60, 6 xxxviii, 18, 9 45. 14 47.5 55. 6-12 xxxix, 7, 4-5 22, 8 xl, 2, 2 35, 3-4
43,5 43,8
33 696 33
44, 14 Epit. xlviii
lv lvii lxxx cxvi
33 33 327 327 621
635 635 621, 569,
623 621 630 617
635 630 630 630
635 630 28 352 727 621 285 292 292 263 294 327 616 294 626
635 635 720 617
635
15,2 17,2 31, 14 39, 16-19 40, 1
617
38,5 46,4
5l»8
5.2
617
631 621
630
xli, 13, 7 18,8 xlii, 28, 13 xliii, 6, 5 xliv, 5, 4 16,9 27.9 xlv, 4, 1
623
35-6 47.7
46, 16 47, 10
617
629
374 286 725 621 617 7
631 261 631 258 258 289
631, 635 7 631 631
621, 623 623, 624 633 603
494
699 Oxy. Epit. 639 Lucan iii, 112-68 604 v, 380 viii, 800-2 451 261 Lucilius 56M 261 69M 632 327M 617 428-9M 632 440M 632 500-1M 624 1172M 1272M = Varro, LL v, 44 717 321 Lucretius i, 1-43 402 ii, 600-1 196 Macrobius, Sat. i, 6, 26 719 7,22 719 7,37 16,7 727 361, 469 17,25 250, 361 17,27 18, 1-6 741 18, 8-9 741 iii, 4, 6 369 624 17,5 624 17,9 470 17. 13 722 Martial v, 19, 5 450 « , 43 Naevius, Punica 19-20 Warmington 715 268 Nonius 167M (from Varro) 442M (from Varro) 311
899
Indices Nonius (jamt.) 518M Obsequens 68 70
ORF>, p. 37 P. 187 8, no. 207 158, no. 16 Orosius v, 18, 26-7 vi, 15> 5 Ovid, Amores iii, 10, 11-14 Fasti i, 229-35 706-8 iii, 37
xix, 40 xxviii, 16 xxix, 12 xxxi, 41 xxxiii, 13
719
639, 7H 74i 631 636
16
218
42-4 43 44 45 46 47
379-92
456 637 639 326 719 335 267 267 266
438
312
xxxiv, 21
iv, 465-6 673-6 v, 137-8
349 740
27 137
312
161
450 361 377
xxxv, 8
722
52 63
54
vi, 209-12 801-3
Met. xiii, 146 Tristia iii, 7, 52 Persius, Sat. v, 105 Schol. vet. in Pers. Sat. ii, 59 Petronius 56 124 1. 270
Plautus, Casino 10 Cist. 408 Most. 357 Persa 437 Pseud. 809 Trin.—title True. 561 Pliny, NH ii, 93-4 iii, 68 vii, 86 95 96
vii, 104-6 205
viii, 4 55 64 76 96 161
« , 55 x, 5 21
xii, 62 xv, 119 xvi, 7 xviii, 15 178
55-6 132
138 141
13 22
561 719 561 451 28 215
624, 632 561 632
108 157
xxxvi, 92 121
xxxvii, 8 Pliny, Ep. i, 17 Priscian, de fig. num. 9 Propertius iv, 4, 23
28
632 744 81
335, 721
8,3 10, 20
Quintilian vi, 3, 44 Sallust, BJ 31, 9 41,7 106,3
451 83
Cat. 31, 4 47,2 59,3 Hist, i, 62M 7 7 M,8 ii, 34M
302
267 735 740 554
43M 46M
412
554 715 739 718 326 594
47M, 6-7 98M, 2 98M,9 iii, 48M, 6 48M, 19 83M
511
735
274, 277 591
639 715 461 448 11
637 35 631
3°
43, 612, 621, 622, 717 7, 610, 616, 628f., 630 34, 593 618, 635, 639 569, 594, 620 635 636 274 620
448 572 441 444 749 257 735 468 715 273 449 450 524
37, 612 356 440 449 72 633 633 617 441 409 720
73 638
82, 705 409, 705 638 638 638
82, 638, 705 633 705 386 638 617
iv,iM [Sallust], Ep. ii, 1, 3 Scribonius Largus, ad Callistum, praef. 594
900
Sources Seneca, Epist. 94, 27 Servius on Vergil, Aen. i, 273 378 398
ii, 296 325
iii, 20 119
iv, 58
719 369 326 369 369 378 369 378
v, 117
321
vii, 188
715
637 678 684
viii, 357 681
xi, 238 306
xii, 841 Eel. iv, 4 viii, 75 ix,46 Sisenna, fr. 29P 52P 72P
Statius, Silvae iii, 3,102-5 iv, 6, 59-60 6, 85-8 9,22
v, 3. 293 Suetonius, Caes. 6 10
37 41 54 59 75 76
Tertullian, Apol. 6,1 10, 7-8 de sped. 9 Tibullus i, 3, 11 Valerius Maximus i, 2, 3
621
3.1 8,1 8,6
iii, 1, 1 5, * iv, 3. 8
388, 735
4. 10 v, 1, 10 2,10
288 95 719 744 274
vi, 4, 5 vii, 3. 4 6,1 6,4
722 720
viii, 1,13
743 741 744 629
14,4 ix, 4, 1
262
6,3
629 582 450 450 74 388 361 135 735 599 626
2,3 11,2
12, 6
Varro, de vit. p. Rom. i, fr. 11R LL v, 42 44 74 92 169 173 174
85 88
Aug. 17 94
Cal. 35 Claud. 11 Nero 2 37
Galba 10 Vesp. 12 Gramm. 12 Vita Terenti 1 Tacitus, Ann. ii, 49, 1 iv, 56 xvi, 7, 3 Hist, i, 86 Terence, Heaut. tint. 606
534 495 495 630 725 339 499 735 524 720 312
374. 456
713 444 727
635 621
450 623 494 294 604
387, 608, 637 285 623 534 450 603 299 318
718 719 717 719 718
37. 590 622, 632 37, 612, 626
90 92
311 311
vii, 45 x, 41 RR i, 10, 2
447 628 591
", 1, 9
599, 718
6,1 ".5
3" 268
See also Nonius Velleius i, 3, 3 6,2 6,5
[Velleius] i, 6, 6 Velleius i, 15 ii, 6, 3
257 326 725 524
7
721
25
632
28, 1
901
715. 721
266 452
735
494. 619
720
418 388 418
68
vi, 49
510
81
624 719
7.2 10, 2 17,2
250 250 250 721 71
636 7i
3i8 250 250
450 329
Indices Velleius (cont.) 40,4 60,4 61,3 62,3 Vergil, Aen. i, 275-6 441-5 iii, 537-43 vi, 779-80 vii, 178-80 678 688
viii, 322 639-41 x, 543 xii, 161-215 206-11 Eel. iv, 4 ix, 46 Georgics ii, 136-76 145
Schol. Ver. on Vergil, Aen. vii, 688 Vit. Prob.
Vitruvius 111,1 450, 488 639 740 639 449 713 713
1,8
Volusius Maecianus, Distr. 45 46 65 73 74
74-5 76
722
719 288 449 719 715 288 715 715 743 744 719 713 288 623
5. Legal Texts CJ x, 72, 5 xi, 11, 1 CTh ix, 22 xii, 6, 13 xv, 9, 1 Coll. Mos. Rom. ii, 5, 5 D i, 2, 2, 27-32 xlviii, 10, 8-9 Inst. iii, 7, 2 Paul., Sent, v, 25, 1 Nov. Valent. 16
902
622
3 7 3 621 621
37, 612 621 621
592 561 561 592 592 623 598 561
623, 631 561 561
Persons IV. I N D E X O F P E R S O N S I have been greatly helped in the compilation of this index by that of Broughton; I have not normally indexed lists of names occurring in Tables nor have I indexed merely casual references. The numbers in parentheses are those of RE. Monetary magistrates are set in bold type. Some of the most important references are taken up again in Index V. The numbers given are page numbers. Antigonus Doson, 42 C. Aburius (1), 276 Antiochus III, 263 M. Aburius (2), 280 T. Antistius (22), 89 C. Aburius Geminus, 63, 276 C. Antius (4), 470 M. Aburius Geminus, 62L, 280 C. Antius Restio (13), 92, 470 P. Accoleius Lariscolus (1), 497 M. Acilius (13), 63,65, 88f., 92,282, 583,727 C. Antonius (20), 496, 739 Iullus Antonius, 740 M\ Acilius (Glabrio?) (cf. 14), 461, 736 L. Antonius M.f.M.n. (Pietas) (23), 100, (Acilius) Balbus, 233? 524ff., 742 M'. Acilius M'.f.L.n. Balbus (26), 47, 63, M. Antonius junior, 102, 538 65. 293 M. Antonius M.f.M.n. (30), 95ff., 493, 495, M'. Acilius C.f.L.n. Glabrio (35), 727 498ff., 569, 572, 595, 628ff., 639f., 671, Aelius, 22, 197 739ff., 750 C. Aelius, i6f., 172 Q. Antonius Balbus (41), 75, 79, 379, 732 (Aelius) Paetus, 231 L. Appuleius Saturninus (29), 70, 72f., 75, P. (Aelius) Paetus (102), 62, 265 323, 603, 629f., 636, 703 Q. Aelius P.f.Q.n. Paetus (104), 266 L. Aemilius Buca (37), 94, 487, 582f., 6oo, M \ Aquillius M'.f.M'.n. (11), 69, 314, 730 M\ Aquillius M'.f.M'.n. (9), 86, 412, 581 736 M. Aquinus (5, cf. 2), 513 M*. Aemilius Lepidus, 68f., 305, 724 Aretas, 447 M'. Aemilius M'.f. Lepidus (62), 305, 444 M. Aemilius M.f.M.n. Lepidus (68), 306, 444 Aristobulus, High Priest, 454 Aristonicus, 730 M. Aemilius M'.f.M'.n. Lepidus (70), 306 Q. Arrius (7), 522 M. Aemilius Lepidus (71), 305 M. Aemilius M.f.Q.n. Lepidus (73)) 87f., Q. Arrius (8), 522 M. Arrius Secundus (34), 100, 522 95. 443. 498ff., 628f., 733. 739*?., 749*"L. Aemilius M.f.Q.n. (Lepidus) Paullus Arsinoe II, 39, 140 Ascanius, 284, 325 (81), 86f., 44if., 583, 734 L. Aemilius L.f.M.n. Paullus (114), 441, 631, L. Atilius, 261 L. Atilius Nomentanus (44, cf. Nomen635 tanus), 261 M. Aemilius Scaurus (141), 83, 86, 446, (Atilius) Saranus (57), 54, 245 461, 493, 734, 749 M. Atilius Saranus (67), 254 Aemilia, Vestal, 444, 510 M. Atilius (Serranus?) (22), 255 Aeneas, 284, 325, 373, 510, 735f. Sex. Atilius M.f.C.n. Serranus (69), 245 Agathocles, 311, 749 Attalus III, 636 Alcibiades, 369 M. Aufidius Rusticus (1), 47, 62, 262 Alexander, 511, 544, 626, 735, 739, 743 M. Aufidius Scaeva, 548 Alexander Helios, 743 Aurelius (1), 51?, 212? A. Allienus (1), 92, 389, 471, 736 C. Aurelius L.f.C.n. Cotta (94), 322 C. Allius Bala (2), 70, 77, 336 C. Aurelius M.f. Cotta (96), 263, 638 Ancus Marcius, 361, 448 L. Aurelius L.Pf.C.n. Cotta (98), 72, 263 Annius, 51?, 212? C. Annius T.f.T.n. (Luscus?) (9), 80, 381, L. Aurelius Cotta (100 and 101), 321 L. Aurelius M.f. Cotta (102), 263 694, 732 M. Aurelius Cotta (104), 263 T. Annius Rufus (78), 47, 54f., 259, 727 M. Aurelius Cotta (105), 55, 62, 263 C. Antestius (10), 47, 54, 257, 596, 625 M. Aurelius M.f. Cotta (107), 263 L. Antestius, 270 Au[relius] Ruf[us] (206), 259 (in fact T. L. Antestius Gragulus (33), 62, 264, 269 Annius Rufus) Antiades, 471 903
Indices M. Aurelius Scaurus (215), 299 M. Aurelius Scaurus, 298f. M. Aurelius M.f.Vol. (Scaurus?) (216), 299 C. Aurunculeius (1), 13, 32, 166 L. Autronius (1-2), 218 L. Axius L.f. Naso (7), 82, 411 M.? Baebius (Tampilus) (17), 268 Q. Baebius Q.f. (20a, Supb. 1.235; or 53, Supb.3.192), 268 (Baebius) Tampilus (42-3?), 51, 209 Cn. Baebius Tampilus (42, cf. 43), 210 M. Baebius Q.f.Cn.n. Tampilus (41, cf. 1, 16), 210 M. Baebius Q.f. Tampilus, 55,62,210,268 L. Bantius, of Nola, 630 M. Barbatius Pollio (1), 525 Bituitus, 71, 286, 299 Bocchus, 450 Bursaeus, 369 A. Caecilius (10), 230 (Caecilius) Metellus, 5of., 208 L. Caecilius Metellus (74), 333 L. Caecilius L.f.C.n. Metellus (72), 287, 390 M. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus (77), 64L, 288 Q. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus Balearicus (82), 63ff., 283, 701 C. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus Caprarius (84, Supb.3.222), 62, 64k, 283, 292 Q. Caecilius C.f.Q.n. Metellus Creticus (87), 287, 723 L. Caecilius L.f.Q.n. Metellus Delmaticus (91), 75, 287?, 335, 730? L. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus Diadematus (93)> 287?, 701, 730? Q. Caecilius Q.f.L.n. Metellus Macedonlcus (94), 55, 208, 253, 287f., 699 Q. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus Nepos (95). 300? Q. Caecilius L.f.Q.n. Metellus Numidicus (97), 300?, 390, 738 Q. Caecilius Q.f.L.n. Metellus Pius (98), 8lf., 388, 390, 705, 732 Q. Caecilius Q.f.Q.n. Metellus Pius Sciplo Nasica (99), 47if., 593, 733, 735, 738 Caeculus, 288 L. Caeslus (4), 68f., 312 M. Calidius (3), 68, 300 Q. Calidius (5), 300 Caligula, 74 Cn. Calpurnius (11), 51, 222 Cn. Calpurnius (68), 222 P. Calpurnius (17), 64, 278 P. Calpurnius Lanarius (49), 278
C. Calpurnius Piso (61, cf. 8), 344 C. Calpurnius Piso (63), 87 Cn. Calpurnius Piso (73), 222 L. Calpurnius Piso (Caesoninus) (89), 47, 70, 72f., 330 L. Calpurnius L.f.L.n. Piso Caesoninus (90), 331, 696 C. Calpurnius Piso Frugi (93), 86f., 419 Cn. Calpurnius Piso (Frugi) (95), 89, 463, 543, 597, 737fL. Calpurnius L.f.C.n. Piso Frugi (96), 701 L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi (98), 75, 77, 340, 369, 390, 58 if-, 617 C. Campanius, 547 T. Carisius (2), 92, 475, 583, 736f. C. Carrinas (1), 390 C. Cassius, 64, 290 L. Cassius Caeicianus (32), 70, 325 C. Cassius Longinus (56), 290 C. Cassius L.f. Longinus (58), 78f., 370 C. Cassius Longinus (59), 513^, 5i6f., 523, 741 L. Cassius Longinus (64), 403 L. Cassius Longinus (65), 86f., 440, 583, 584, 602 Q. Cassius Longinus (70), 452, 734 L. Cassius Longinus Ravilla (72), 440, 452 Sp. Cassius Vicellinus (91), 326, 403 L. Cestius (4), 500 M. Cipius M.f. (2), 68f., 3O3ff. Circe, 220, 377 Claudius I, 275 Claudius II, 582 C. Claudius Ap.f.C.n. Centho (104), 521 C. Claudius M.f.M.n. Marcellus (217), 89, 460, 462, 737f. M. Claudius M.f.M.n. Marcellus (220), 34, 43, 330, 460 M. Claudius Marcellus (226), 330 Ti. Claudius Nero (253), 398, 733 Ap. Claudius C.f.Ap.n. Pulcher (295), 521 Ap. Claudius Ap.f.C.n. Pulcher (296), 68f., 312, 398, 603 C. Claudius Ap.f.C.n. Pulcher (302), 68, 313, 599 Claudia, Vestal, 521 Claudia Quinta, 521 Cleopatra, 95, 102, 539, 743 Cleopatra Selene, 743 P. Clodius M.f. (10), 95, 502, 599f. P. Clodius Pulcher (48), 453, 695 C. Clodius Vestalis (62), 100, 521 T. Cloelius (Cloulius) (5), 63, 285, 729 T. Cloelius (Cloulius) (see 5), 70, 331, 595, 603, 730, 749 T. Cloelius, 285
904
Persons C. Clovius (4), 94, 486, 573, 597, 737 C. Cluvius Saxula (14), 229 (Cluvius) Saxula, 233 M. Cocceius Nerva (13), 525 L. Coelius (i), 51, 222, 602 C. Coelius C.f.C.n. Caldus (12 and 13), 70, 324, 459, 602 C. Coelius Caldus (14), 88, 457, 749 L. Coelius Caldus (15), 459 C. Considius Nonianus (12), 87f., 448, 734 C. Considius Paetus (14), 92, 476, 736 C. Coponius (3 and 9), 89, 461, 737f. M\ Cordius Rufus (2), 92, 473, 736 Cordus, see P. Mucius Scaevola L. Cornelius L.f. Balbus (69), 100, 526,742 Cn. Cornelius Blasio (75), 68f., 309, 311, 584, 749 P. Cornelius Blasio (cf. 76), 239 M. Cornelius M.f.M.n. Cethegus (92), 32 (Cornelius) Cetegus (97), 69, 302, 730 (L. Cornelius) Cinna (103 and 105), 232 L. Cornelius L.f.L.n. Cinna (106), 603, 703 Cn. Cornelius Dolabella (131), 18, 175 P. Cornelius P.f. Dolabella (141), 639 L. Cornelius Lentulus (187), 13, 32, 165 Cn. Cornelius Cn.f. Lentulus Clodianus (216), 78, 310, 356, 731 L. Cornelius P.f. Cms (218), 89, 409, 460, 462, 737f. Cn. Cornelius P.f. Lentulus Marcellinus (228), 82, 310, 407, 544?, 593, 705, 733 P. Cornelius Lentulus MarceUl f. (230), 70, 329, 730 P. Cornelius Lentulus Marcellinus (231), 83, 409, 705 P. Cornelius Lentulus (Marcellinus) (232), 88, 460 P. Cornelius P.f.L.n. Lentulus Spinther (238, cf. 204), 82f., 409, 705, 733, 735 L. Cornelius Lentulus Spinther (239), 514, 74i P. Cornelius Lentulus Sura (240), 409 A. Cornelius Mammula (257), 32, 604 P. Cornelius Cn.f.P.n. Rufinus (302), 250 P. Cornelius L.f.L.n. Scipio (330), 23 P. Cornelius P.f.P.n. Scipio Africanus Aemilianus (335), 72, 636, 699 P. Cornelius P.f.L.n. Scipio Africanus (336), 33,196, 310, 630, 696, 746 L. Cornelius L.f.L.n. Scipio Asiaticus (Asiagenus) (338), 69f., 310, 319, 374 Cn. Cornelius Scipio Calvus (34s), 23 P. Cornelius P.f.P.n. Scipio Nasica Serapio (354), 624, 733 Cn. Cornelius L.f. Sisenna (cf. 373), 69, 310, 318, 730
Faustus Cornelius Sulla (377), 88, 374, 449> 638, 734 P. Cornelius Sulla (384), 250 P. Cornelius Sulla, 54, 249, 727, 730 L. Cornelius Sulla (379), 250 L. Cornelius L.f.P.n. Sulla Felix (392), 64, 78, 8off., 250, 313, 349, 367, 373ff., 381, 386ff., 392, 397f., 413. 446. 450, 456, 465, 492f., 569, 581, 593. 596, 6oiff., 618, 637f., 694. 697, 703, 705, 709, 727, 732ff., 737 Q. Cornificius (7, Supb.1.331), 100, 518, 604, 742 L. Cosconius (6), 73, 298f. M. Cosconius (8), 299 C. Cossutius Maridianus (4), 94, 487, 600 L. Cossutius Cf. Sabula (6), 408, 603 M. Crepereius (1), 411 Q. Crepereius Rocus (8), 82, 410, 603 P. Crepusius (1), 79, 374f. L. Crltonius (2), 78, 367, 603 L. Cupiennius (3), 257 C. Curiatius (3, cf. 10, 11), 260 C. Curiatius Trlgeminus (10), 55, 260, 272 C. Curiatius Trigeminus filius (11), 63ff., 260,271 Q. Curtius (11), 300, 313 C. Decimius Flavus (9), 251 (Decimius) Flavus, 54, 251 T. Didius T.f. Sex.n. (5), 68f., 308, 453 Dionysius of Tripoli, 454 L. Domitius Cn.f. (Ahenobarbus), 286 Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, 286 Cn. Domitius Cn.f.L.n. Ahenobarbus (19), 48, 5if., 218, 286 Cn. Domitius (cf. 20, Supb.3.349), 286, 729 Cn. Domitius Cn.f.Cn.n. Ahenobarbus (20, Supb.3.349), 286, 299, 701, 735 Cn. Domitius Cn.f.Cn.n. Ahenobarbus (21), 68, 71, 300, 313, 601 Cn. Domitius L.f.Cn.n. Ahenobarbus (23), 100, 527f., 742f. Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus (25), 250 L. Domitius Cn.f.Cn.n. Ahenobarbus (27), 639, 696, 735 Domitius Calvinus (40), 286 Cn. Domitius M.f.M.n. Calvinus (43, cf. n;Supb.3.394), 533 C. Duillius M.f.M.n. (3), 626 Cn. Egnatius Cn.f. (8), 406 C. Egnatius Cn.f.Cn.n. Maximus (27), 82, 405, 581, 733 C. Egnatuleius Cf. (1), 70, 332, 595, 603, 73of. Eppius (1), 472, 487. 738
905
Indices C. Fabius Cf. Hadrlanus (15 and 82), 70, 326, 730 L. Fabius L.f. Hispaniensls (84), 381 Q. Fabius Q.f.Q.n. Labeo (91), 258, 294 Q. Fabius Labeo (92), 65, 294 Q. Fabius Labeo, 294 Q. Fabius Maximus (107), 388 Q. Fabius Q. Servilianl f.Q.n. Maximus (Eburnus) (111), 64f., 289, 701 Q. Fabius Q.f.Q.n. Maximus Verrucosus (116), 34 C. Fabius C.f.M.n. Pictor (123), 35f., 714 N. Fabius Pictor, 292 N. Fabius Pictor (125), 63, 291, 578 Q. Fabius Pictor (127), 292 M. Fabrinius (1), 63, 280 C. Fannius M.f. (7), 295 C. Fannius Cf. (7), 295 M. Fannius Cf. (14), 75, 295 M. Fannius (15), 78, 367, 603 L. Farsuleius Mensor (1), 82, 406, 733 Faustulus, 267 Flaminius (1), 614 C. Flaminius C.f.L.n. (2), 613 L. Flaminius C[h]ilo (6), 68, 314 L. Flaminius Chilo (7), 95, 496, 600, 619, 739 C Flavius Hemic[?] (11), 516 Fonteius (2), 305, 316 Fonteius, friend of Cicero, 453 C. Fonteius (6 and ?2), 68f., 304, 316, 596, 715 M\ Fonteius (8 and ?2), 305, 316 M\ Fonteius Cf. (9), 78f., 369, 453,578 M \ Fonteius (10), 369,453 M. Fonteius (12), 78, 361, 453 P. Fonteius P.f. Capito (25), 453, 734 Q. Fufius Q.f.C.n. Calenus (10), 83, 86, 413. 733 Cn. Fulvius (14), 300 M. Fulvius M.f.Q.n. Flaccus (58), 635 Q. Fulvius M.f.Q.n. Flaccus (59), 34 M. Fulvius M.f.Ser.n. Nobilior (91), 306 C Fundanius (1), 328, 595, 603, 730 C. Fundanius Cf. (1), 328 S. Furius (30), 52, 221 L. Furius Cn.f. Brocchus (39), 86f., 440 P. Furius Crassipes (57), 79, 371, 603 L. Furius Phllus (77), 216 L. Furius Philus (78), 297 M. Furius L.f. Philus (79), 65, 297, 581,731 (Furius) Purpurio, 48, 54, 238 (Furius) Purpurio, 222 L. Furius Purpurio (86), 222 Galba, Emperor, 728
Gar[gonlus] (4), 78f., 364 Cn. Gellius (4), 62, 265 L. Gellius L.f.L.n. Popllcola (18), 525 Hadrian, 81 Hannibal, 20 Hasdrubal, general in 230 B.C., 287, 390 M. Herennius M.f. (10), 317 Herennius Siculus, 318 Hiero II, 30, 33, 634 Hieronymus, 29ft., 41, 46 A. Hirtius A.f. (2), 93, 478, 569, 593, 736 C. Hosldius Cf. Geta (4), 86f., 419, 581 L. Hostilius Saserna (23), 92, 463, 736 L. Hostilius Tubulus (26), 322 L. H[ostilius] Tub[ulus], 70, 322 L. Itei[us] or Itei[Uus] (L. Itius), 232 Iugurtha, 450, 727 L. Iulius (29), 55, 260 L. Iulius (30), 327, 730 L. Iulius Bursio (126), 78f., 368, 378, 73if. C Iulius C.f.C.n. Caesar (131), 88ff., 437, 46iflf., 5iof., 523, 53of., 544, 399f., 604, 6i7ff., 639, 693ff., 707, 709, 711, 727f., 734ff., 749f. C. Iulius C.f.C.n. Caesar (Augustus) (132), 95ff., 481, 488, 495, 497, 499ff., 573. 597 602, 609, 617,626,628f., 639f., 693f., 739ff. L. Iulius L.f.Sex.n. Caesar (142), 70, 323, 730 Sex. Iulius Caesar (130), 284, 730 L. Iulius Salinator (433), see L. Livius Salinator lulus, 735 C Iunius (14), 232 L. Iunius (20), 259 M. Iunius (22), 34f., 239 L. Iunius M.f. Brutus (46a, Supb.5.356ff.), 456, 741, 749 M. Iunius Brutus (Q. Servilius Caepio Brutus) (53), 88, 455, 514-18, 523f-> 608, 639f-. 734> 741 D. Iunius Brutus Albinus (53a, Supb.5.369), 92, 466, 547, 697, 711, 736 C. Iunius C.f.C.n. Bubulcus Brutus (62), 339 D. (Iunius) Silanus (160), 259 D. Iunius Silanus (Manlianus) (161), 239,339 D. Iunius L.f. Silanus (162), 73, 77f., 259, 336. 578 M. Iunius Silanus (167), 259 M. Iunius Silanus (168), 259 M. Iunius D.f.D.n. Silanus (169), 259, 300?, 313 M. Iunius Silanus (172), 102, 338, 744 (Iuventlus) Laterensls, 79, 372, 732
906
Persons P. Maenius M.f. Ant[ias] or Antfiaticus] (18), 63, 213, 279 Mago, 339 C. Maianius (1), 54, 248 T. Mallius, 313 T. Maloleius, 313 L. Mamilius (2), 52, 219 Julia Domna, 721 C. Mamilius Limetanus (7), 377 C. Mamilius Limetanus (8), 79, 374f., Q. Labienus Parthicus (5), 329, 604, 742 C. Laelius C.f.C.n. (Sapiens) (3), 625 584 C. Licinius Crassus (52), 307 Mamilia, 220 L. Licinius L.f.C.n. Crassus (55), 711*., 77, A. Manlius (12), 318 298f., 601 A. Manlius A.f. (13 and 70), 82, 397, 603, M. Licinius Crassus (56), 88 732 T. Manlius L.f.A.n. Imperiosus Torquatus P. Licinius Crassus (63), 88, 454, 734 M. Licinius P.f.M.n. Crassus Dives (68), 88, (57). 308 T. Manlius Mancinus (61, cf. 16), 312?, 454. 705 603? P. Licinius P.f.P.n. Crassus Dives Mucianus A. Manlius Q.f. Ser[gianus?] (63), 69^, (72), 624 P. Licinius P.f. Crassus Iunlanus Dama73. 3i8, 730 L. Manlius Torquatus (78), 68f., 308, 730 slppus (65 and 75), 472 L. Manlius L.f. Torquatus (79), 87, 386 C. Licinius P.f. Getha (88), 701 L. Licinius L.f.L.n. Lucullus (104), 80, L. Manlius Torquatus (80), 87, 439 Cn. Manlius Cn.f.L.n. Vulso (91), 635 638 P. Manlius Vulso (98), 13, 32, 165 C. Licinius L.f. Macer (112), 781°., 370 Marcius, seer, 361 (L. Licinius) Murena (120), 237 L. Licinius L.f.L.n. Murena (123), 237, 407 M \ Marcius (17), 277 M. Marcius M'.f. (22), 63f., 277 Licinius Nerva (130), 469 Q. Marcius (30), 65, 68, 299 A. Licinius Nerva (132), 92, 469, 736 P. Licinius Nerva (135 and 136), 68f., 306, (Marcius) Censorinus (42), 377 C. Marcius Censorinus (43), 78f., 357 596, 723. 725. 730 L. Marcius Censorinus (47), 79, 374, 377, P. Licinius Varus (175), 469 730 Licinia (181), 71 L. Marcius L.f.C.n. Censorinus (48), 377 L. Livineius Regulus, 509 L. Livineius Regulus (3), 95, 502, 581, 599f. Q. Marcius Libo (70), 25s M. Livius Drusus (18), 77, 569, 616 L. Marcius Q.f.Q.n. Philippus (75), 68f., L. Livius Salinator, 78f., 370 307, 449, 638, 703, 724 (L. Lollius) Palicanus (20), 482, 736 L. Marcius L.f.Q.n. Philippus (76), 88 M. Lollius Palicanus (21, cf. 8), 483 L. Marcius L.f.L.n. Philippus (77, cf. 74), M\ Lucilius M.f. Pompt. (11), 327 87f., 448 M. Lucilius (12), 327 Q. Marcius L.f.Q.n. Philippus (79), 285 M. Lucilius Rufus (31), 327, 730 Q. (Marcius) Philippus (82), 64^, 284 Cn. Lucretius Trio (32), 62, 269 Q. (Marcius) Philippus (83), 448 L. Lucretius Trio (33), 404, 578 Q. Marcius Rex (90), 306, 448 C. Lutatius C.f.C.n. Catulus (4), 315 C. Marcius L.f.C.n. Rurilus (97), 361 Q. Lutatius Q.f. Catulus (7), 315 Q. Marcius Q.f.Q.n. Tremulus (106), 308 Q. L[utatius] C[erco] or C[atulus], 50, C. Marius C.f.C.n. (14, Supb.6.1363), 78, 207 307, 327f., 332, 335, 361, 363, 372, 392, Q. Lutatius Cerco (14), 68, 315, 603, 724 413, 452, 569, 581, 6o2ff., 605, 608, 629f., 703, 720, 73of. Sp. Maelius (3), 273ff., 289 C. Marius C.f.C.n. (15), 328, 637 C. Maenius P.f.P.n. (9), 279 Q. Marius (26), 52, 218 C. Maenius (10), 213 C. Marius Cf. Capito (33), 79, 82, 392 P. Maenius (12), 48, 51, 213, 279 M. Marius Gratidianus (42), 614 Q. Maenius (14), 213, 216 Matienus (1), 52, 74, 226 T. Maenius (15), 213 P. Matienus (6), 547
M. Iuvcntius Laterensis (16), 372 M'. Iuventius L.f. Laterensis, 372 (Iuventius) Thalna (25), 52, 225 C. (Iuventius) Thalna (28), 54, 247 P. Iuventius Thalna (31), 225
907
Indices C. Memmius (5), 315 C. Memmius L.f.Gal. (6), 78f., 321, 363, 603 C. Memmius (8), 83, 451 C. Memmius (9), 83, 88, 451, 734 L. Memmius (12 and 13), 69, 315 L. Memmius Gal. (cf. 14), 320, 364, 730 L. Memmius L.f. Gal. (14), 78f., 321, 363, 603 L. Memmius Gal. (15), 250 M. Mettius (2), 94, 487, 736 M. Minatius Sabinus (3), 480 Minucius (7), 603 L. Minucius (16), 64, 278, 603 C. Minucius Augurinus (31), 64, 273 M. Minucius Augurinus (32), 274 P. Minucius Augurinus (33), 274 Ti. Minucius Cf. Augurinus (35), 63ft., 273f. L. Minucius Basilus (37), 279, 603 L. Minucius P.f.M.n. Esquilinus Augurinus (40), 273ff. M. Minucius Faesus (42), 274, 276 M. Minucius Q.f. Rufus (54, cf. 48), 296 Q. Minucius Rufus (56), 75, 296 Q. Minucius M.f. Thermus (66), 70, 324 Mithridates, 637f. P. Monetius soc.l. Philogenes, 617 Mucius, assassin of Porsinna, 413 C. Mucius, architect, 413 P. Mucius Scaevola (18) (Cordus), 83, 86, 413. 733 Q Mucius Q.f.Q.n. Scaevola (Augur) (21), 261 L. Mummius L.f.L.n. (7a), 237 L. Munatius L.f.L.n. Plancus (30), 100, 468, 485, 528, 736, 743 Murrius (1), 311 Q. Murrius, 311 L. Mussidius T.f. Longus (3), 9s, 502,599f., 602 (Naevius) Balbus, 233? C. Naevius Balbus (10), 397, 733 Q. Nasidius (4), 94, 495> 739 Cn. Nerius (3), 89, 460, 583, 603 Nero, 81 Nicomachus, artist, 468 Nomentanus, 261 M. Nonius Sufenas (52), 87, 445, 732, 734 Sex. Nonius Sufenas (53), 445 C. Norbanus (5), 372, 390, 603 C. Norbanus (6 and 9a), 79, 372, 500, 603, 732 Numa, 333, 361, 410, 414, 447, 730, 749 C. Numitorius (Nemetorius) C.f.Lem., 278
C. Numitorius (1), 64, 277 C. Numonius Vaala (1), 522, 581 M. Octavius (31), 275 (Octavius) Balbus (43), see C. Naevius Balbus Octavia, 531, 743 T. Ofidius (Aufidius) M.f.Pop., 262 Ogulnius (1), 364 Cn. Ogulnius (2), 714 Q. Ogulnius L.f.A.n. Gallus (5), 35f., 714 Opei[mius], 240 Opimi[us], 239 L. Opimius Q.f.Q.n. (4), 74, 28if. M. Opimius (8), 65, 282 Q. Opimius (10), 239f., 282 Q. Oppius (21), 545, 573. 597 T. Otacilius Crassus (12), 604 Pamphilos, gem-cutter, 579 C. Papirius Carbo (33), 7if., 75 Cn. Papirius Cf. Carbo (37), 75, 296 Cn. Papirius Cn.f.C.n. Carbo (38), 77, 390 M. Papirius Carbo (39), 75, 295 (Papirius) Turdus (75), 241 C. Papirius Turdus (76), 241 L. Papius (6), 398 L. Papius Celsus (10), 481, 736 (Pedanius) Costa (2), 517 M. Perpema M.f.M.n. (5), 703 M. Perperna Vento (6), 413 Perseus, 441 Petlllius Capitolinus (7), 497, 592 P. Petronius Turpilianus, 356 Philip V, 285, 307, 544, 724 (Pinarius) Nat[ta] (14), 54, 246 (Pinarius) Natta (14), 54, 252 L. Pinarius Scarpus (27), 102, 542, 572, 595. 744 L. Plaetorius L.f. Pap. (6), 408 Q. Plaetorius, 547 L. Plaetorius L.f. (Cestianus) (14), 408 L. Plaetorius Cestianus (15), 518 M. Plaetorius M.f. Cestianus (16), 83,86f., 4H. 436 Cn. Plancius (4), 83, 88, 455. 734 Plautius (3), 454 A. Plautius (8), 83, 88, 454, 734 C. Plautius (9), 296 C. Plautius P.f.P.n. Decianus (18), 445 L. Pl[autius] H[ypsaeus], 48, 210 L. Plautius Hypsaeus (19), 211 P. Plautius Hypsaeus (23), 83, 86f., 444, 446, 749 L. Plautius (Plotius) Plancus (Munatius 26; Plotius 10), 92, 468, 711, 736 C Plutius (1), 296
908
Persons Cn. Pompeius Cn.f. Crust. (6), 278 Q. Pompeius A.f. (12), 268, 699 Sex. Pompeius (17), 62, 267, 278, 719 Cn. Pompeius Cn.f.Sex.n. Magnus (31), 83, 92, 412, 45of>, 454ff-> 457. 459, 463, 488, 604, 608, 638f., 695f., 705, 707. 727. 733ff-» 735ff-» 742f. Cn. Pompeius Magnus (32), 94,413,479*?., 578, 597. 739. 742 Sex. Pompeius Magnus Pius (33), 94, 102, 486f., 520, 578, 597, 739, 742 Q. Pompeius Q.f. Rufus (39), 374, 456 Q. Pompeius Rufus (41), 88, 374, 456, 734 Cn. Pompeius Sex.f.Cn.n. Strabo (45), 267k, 299. 320, 325, 391, 703 Pompo, 333 Cn. Pomponius (3), 299, 410 L. Pomponius Cn.f. (5), 298f. L. Pomponius Molo (4 and 22), 70,299,332, 730f. Q. Pomponius Molo, 547 Q. Pomponius Musa (23), 87, 437, 733 Q. Pomponius Rufus (26), 82, 410 M. Porcius, 352 C. Porcius Cato (5), 65, 75, 294 M. Porcius M.f. Cato (9), 218, 352, 621, 631, 633 M. Porcius M.f.M.n. Cato (10), 352 M. Porcius Cato (not in RE), 77, 351, 579 M. Porcius Cato (11), 352 M. Porcius Cato (12), 352 M. Porcius Cato (Uticensis) (16), 352, 473, 524, 620, 638, 738 M. Porcius Laeca (17), 63, 65, 74, 293 P. Porcius Laeca (21), 68f., 313 L. Porcius L.f.M.n. Licinus (23), 299 L. Porcius Licinus (25), 298f. Porsinna, 273, 413 C. Postumius (12), 407 A. Postumius Albinus (31), 466 A. Postumius S.f. Albinus (35), 333, 731 A. Postumius A.f.S.n. Albinus (36), 8if., 389 L. Postumius Albinus (43), 64,281,316,730 L. Postumius A.f.A.n. Albinus (41), 389 L. Postumius Sp.f.L.n. Albinus (42), 281 Sp. Postumius Albinus (45), 389 A. Postumius P.f. Albus Regillensis, 335 L. Procllius (1), 82, 396 Ptolemy II, 39 Ptolemy V, 444 Ptolemy Alexander I, 605, 637 C. Publicius Q.f. (9), 82, 396, 582, 727, 732 M. Publicius (12), 93, 479 Q. Publicius (13), 396
C. (Publicius) Malleolus (18), 70, 299, 333, 584, 729, 731 C. (Publicius) Malle[olus] C.f. (19), 298f. L. Publicius Malleolus (20), 447 M. Publicius L.f.L.n. Malleolus (22), 447 Publicia L.f., 727 M. Pupius Piso (12), 87, 442 M. Pupius M.f. Piso Frugi Calpurnianus (10), 87, 443 Pyrrhus, 285, 713, 716, 718 Sex. Qfuinctilius?] (3), 51, 221 P. Quinctilius Varus (12), 221 Ti. Q[uinctius?] (18), 68f., 3iof. T. Quinctius T.f.L.n. Flamininus (45), 291. 544, 593, 731 T. Quinctius T.f.T.n. Flamininus (47), 291 T. Qfuinctius] (Flamininus) (48), 291, 311 Quirinus, 451 Rea Silvia, 740 Remus, 267 C. Rennius C.I. Laetus, 264 C. Renius (1), 62, 264 Rhome, 722 Romulus, 267, 418, 449, 45if., 723, 733, 740 L. Roscius Fabatus (15), 86f., 439 L. Rubrius Dossenus (17), 78f., 362, 569, 572, 731 L. Rustius (1), 404 L. Rutilius Flaccus (16), 403 P. Sabinus (Sabinus 30), see P. Vettius Sabinus C. Sae[nius], 231 Safra, 54, 251 Q. Salvidienus Rufus Salvius (4), 101, 521, 528, 743 P. Satrienus (1), 403, 579 L. Saufeius (4), 54, 248 C. Scribonius (4), 54, 246 C. Scribonius Curio (8), 247 L. Scribonius Libo (19), 86f., 44if., 734 L. Scribonius L.f. Libo (20), 442 L. Sempronius Atratinus (26), ioif., 533, 597 C. Sempronius Gracchus (47), 74, 634ff., 697, 701 Ti. Sempronius Gracchus (54), 266, 275, 624f., 634ff., 699, 733 Ti. Sempronius Gracchus (56), 529, 600, 742 L. Sempronius Pitio (74), 256 C. Sentius C.f. (3), 327 L. Sentius C.f. (6), 327, 730 P. Sepullius Macer (1), 94, 487
909
Indices L. Sergius L.f. Catilina (23), 302, 705, 720 M. Sergius Silus (40), 302 M. Sergius Silus (42), 68f., 302, 601, 730 Q. Sertorius (3), 82, 92, 371, 381, 386, 409, 413, 638, 733 C. Servilius (Geminus?) (9), 270 C. Servilius (12, cf. 11), 270, 447 C. Servilius M.f. (14), 55, 62, 64, 270 C. Servilius C.f. (16), 87f., 447 M. Servilius (18), 270 M. Servilius C.f. (19), 270, 328 M. Servilius C.f. (21), 447, 516 C. Servilius Ahala (32), 289, 456, 749 Q. Servilius Caepio (50), 47, 70, 72f., 330, 636 Q. Servilius Caepio Brutus, see M. Iunius Brutus (Iunius 53) P. Servilius Casca Longus (53), 517 C. Servilius (Geminus) (59), 270 C. Servilius C.f.P.n. Geminus (60), 270 P. Servilius Q.f.Cn.n. Geminus (62), 271 M. Servilius C.f.P.n. Pulex Geminus (78), 270, 289 P. Servilius M.f. Rullus (79), 329, 730 P. Servilius Rullus (81), 329, 638 C. Servilius Vatia (13 and 91), 64f., 270,289 P. Servilius C.f.M.n. Vatia Isauricus (93), 270, 329, 388 L. Servius Rufus (6), 523, 742 Servius Tullius, 35fT., 599 L. Sestius (2), 515, 741 T. Sextius (13), 100 Q. Sicinius (12), 89, 460, 461, 734. 737fA. Spuri[us ?] or Spuri[lius ?] (Spurius 2), 62, 263 L. Status Murcus (2), 519, 742 C. Sulpicius Cf. (9), 320 Ser. Sulpicius (20, 21 and 96), 88, 459, 734 C. Sulpicius Galba (51), 320 P. Sulpicius Galba (55), 87, 418 Ser. Sulpicius Galba (60), 320 P. Sulpicius Ser.f.P.n. Galba Maximus (64), 34. 459 C. Sulpicius Q.f.Q.n. Paterculus (81), 460 Ser. Sulpicius Rufus (94, cf. 31), 523 Ser. Sulpicius Q.f. Rufus (95), 88 Tarpeia, 355 C. Tarquitius P.f. (1), 381 Tatius, 355f., 414, 749 Telegonus, 220, 377 Terence, 257 C. Terentius Lucanus (56), 55, 256 (Terentius) Var[ro] (see 76), 50, 207 (Terentius) Var[r]o (see 76, also 81), 236 (Terentius) Varro (78), 89, 463, 737f.
C. (Terentius) Varro (76), i6f., 172 M. Terentius Varro (84, Supb.6.1172), 89, 547 P. Terentius Varro, 547 M. Terentius M.f. Varro Lucullus (Licinius 109), 80 Thorius Flaccus, 323 L. Thorius Balbus (4), 70, 323 Tigranes, 454, 545 Timaeus, 36f., 41 C. Titinius (6), 55, 62, 261 C. Titinius (7), 262 C. Titinius (8), 262 M. Titinius (12), 52, 220 M. Titinius (13, cf. 20), 221 M. Titinius Curvus (20, cf.12, 13), 221 C. Titinius Gadaeus (21), 261 Q. Titius (33), 75, 77, 344, 349 L. Tlturius Sabinus (2), 75,77f., 355, 582f., 731 Todus, 48, 52, 214 Trajan, 2O7f. L. Trebanius (1), 64, 272 Tryphon, 285 M. Tullius (11), 65, 68, 70, 75, 297 M. Tullius M.f.M.n. Cicero (29), 361, 435, 441, 453, 639, 697, 734 M. Tullius M.f.A.n. Decula (34), 297 D. Turullius (l), 542, 744 L. Tur[ullius], 547 Ulysses, 220, 377, 726 C. Urbinius, 313 Q. Urbinius, 312 Valerius] (4), 240 L. Valerius Acisculus (94), 483, 736f. C. Valerius Flaccus (166), 263 C.Valerius C.f. Flaccus (167), 62, 262 C. Valerius C.f.L.n. Flaccus (168), 80, 263, 379. 732 L. Valerius L.f.L.n. Flaccus (135), 281 L. Valerius L.f.L.n. Flaccus (175), 316 L. Valerius L.f.L.n. Flaccus (176 and 177), 316 L. Valerius Flaccus (178), 637 M. Valerius P.f.P.n. Laevinus (211), 32, 192 M. Valerius MessaUa (254 and 255), 88, 457, 603, 734 M. Valerius Messalla (Rufus) (268), 457, 603 M. Vargunteius (4), 63, 65, 283 Q. Varius Geminus, 602 P. Ventidius P.f. Bassus (5), 533 Vercingetorix, 464, 467 M. Vergilius (1 and 4), 364 C. Verres (1), 703 Vettienus, 547
910
Persons P. (Vettius?) Sabinus (Sabinus 30; Vettius 15). 70, 33i» 595. 603, 730, 749 T. Vettius Sabinus (9a =14 and 11), 86, 414 Mam. Veturius, 266 Ti. Veturius (6), 62, 74, 264, 266, 749 L. Veturius L.f.L.n. Philo (20), 34 Ti. Veturius Philo (22), 266 T. Veturius Gracchi.f. Sempronianus (23), 266 C. Vibius C.f. Pansa (15), 75> 77. 346. 4^5. 579. 583. 731, 749
C. Vibius C.f.C.n. Pansa Caetronianus (16), 92, 464, 697, 711, 736 C. Vibius Varus (20), 95, 502, 600 L. Vinicius (1), 88, 457, 734 M. (Vipsanius) Agrippa L.f. (2), 101, 535, 744 Q. Voconius Vitulus (5), 530, 742 M. Volteius M.f. (2), 399, 594 L. Vol[umnius] L.f. Strabo (3 and 14), 82, 39*
911
Indices V. GENERAL INDEX Abruzzi, see Finds Acarnania, coinage of, as Roman booty, 21, 32 Accounts, 633 n. 1; see also Delos, Reckoning Acilii, and Hercules, 727 adulescens, Ciceronian use of (and similar terms), 72 Aediles, issues of, 603, 607 'Aedilician' coin-types, 729 Aegates Insulae, battle of, 315 Aegina, 459-60 Aesculapius, in 87 B.C., 363 Aes signatum: date and function of, 41-2; types of, 716-18 Aetolia, treaty with Rome, 21 Africa, victory of Pompey in, 413; see also Mints Age: of Caesar, on coins, 92; of M. Antonius, on coins, 499 Agrarian programme, of L. Saturninus, 629- 30 Agrigentum, Punic coinage of, 16 Aion, not appearing on Republican coinage, 510 Alba Fucens, archaeological evidence from, 40 Alexander motifs, in Republican coinage, 735, 740 n. 1, 743, 747 n. 5; see also Gorgoneion Alexandria, artistic motifs from, no evidence for in Republican coinage, 290, 743; see also Egypt Allobroges, defeat referred to, 297 Anagnia, see Mints Ancile, 266, 735 Anonymous issues, among signed issues, 1223 passim, 48, 50-3, 54 T. Antistius, reluctant to identify his coinage, 89 Antium, 404 M. Antonius: age of, on coins, 499; birthday of, 499; celebrated in moneyers' coinage, 494~5, 510-11; coin types of, 739-44; debasement by, 569; Dionysiac predilections of, 743 n. 4; finances of in 44 B.C. and later, 639-40; legions of, 541, 671; portrait of, 495. 747 > 749-50; reconciliation with Octavian, 531, 532, 743; titulature of, 538, 739-44 i and Alexander, 740, 743, 747; and Armenian victory, 743; and lions, 740, 743; and Octavian, ovatio of, issue celebrating, 101, 743; and Sol, 740, 743; and Victory, 740; as Imperator, 740, 743; see also Engravers, Hercules, Mint Aphrodisias, Sullan dedication at, 373 Apollo, 312, 714, cf. 510; and Jupiter, 312; and Mercury, 435; and libertas, 388, 731-2, 741; and Iulii, 325, 510; and Octavian,
744; and C. Cassius, 741; and M. Iunius Brutus, 741; and L. Cornelius Sulla, 388 Apollonia, coinage of, 7; see also Mints L. Appuleius Saturninus: agrarian programme of, 629-30; corn-distribution of, 73, 703 Aqua Marcia, payment for, 699 Aqua Tepula, payment for, 701 Aqueducts, 305, 448 Archaeological evidence, 29, 32, 40, 41 (615), 71 (bis), 74 (61s), 81, 94 argentum publicum, 605 Aricia, 418, 497 Aries, constellation, 404 Armenia, 743 Arsenic, in Roman bronze coinage, 573 Artemis: wearing polos, 518, cf. 741 n. 6; of Ephesus, 738; see also Diana Artists, for Republican coinage: numbers of, 578-9, 745-50; scope for, 728 n. 6, 730, 745-9 i one signature known, 538, 579, 585, 587, 747; see also Engravers, Hercules Arverni, defeat referred to, 297 Asia, see Mints Atella, coinage of, 31, 720 Athenian new-style tetradrachms, Roman imitations of, 80 Attis, not represented on Republican coinage, 303 Augurate, symbols of: and Sulla, 373-4, 456; and Octavian, 741 n. 1 Augustus, see Octavian Aventine, see Diana Axii, 260, 412 Bacchus, and Jehovah, 454-5; see also Dionysus Ballot, secret, 290-1; see also Lex, Tessera, Voting BaaiAtus, title refused by C. Cassius, 741 Bellona, 307 Bells, cult associations of, 273 Bigati, 613-14, 630 Bitalemi, archaeological evidence from, 41 Booty: coinage produced from, 21, 32, 572; distribution of, 41-2, 45 Brettii, coinage of; 30, 40-1 Brockages, 583 Bronze coinage: composition of, 572-7; weight of, 595-7; see also Ratios Brundisium: coinage of, 42; see also Mints Bursaeus, not alluded to on no. 352, 369 Buteo, 326 Buthrotum, see Mints
912
General Index Caeciae Insulae, 326 Caecilii Metelli, see Elephant, Vulcan L. Caecilius Metellus Delmaticus, see Hoards, Zasiok Calatia, coinage of, 31 Campania, see Mints Canusium, coinage of, 310; see also Mints Capitoline: temple, 400, 497, 715; see also Jupiter; triad, 310; wolf, 403 Capua: coinage of, 21, 31, 43, 720; family symbols at, 726 Carthage, and Rome, 634, 720; see also Punic coinage, Second Punic War C. Cassius: coinage of in 43-42 B.C., 741-2; refusal of title of BCKTIXEU;, 741 n. 9; titulature of, 741 n. 3; and Apollo, 741 Casting of Republican coinage, 589 Castor, priority over Pollux, 136 Caudine Forks, see Foedus Censors: and coinage, 42-3, 601-2, 616-17, 714; and abuse of right to choose cointypes, 729 Census: classes, 625, 627, 628, 631; of Equites, 623 Cerealia, 290; see also Ludi Ceres: as coin-type, 730, 736; temple of, 326, 403 Chaeronea, battle of, 373, 450 Cilicia, see Finds, Mints Cisalpine Gaul: agrarian distribution in, 629-30; currency of, 629-30 Civitas: sine suffragio, incompatible with the right of coinage, 31; and libertas, 407, 733 Classes, census, see Census classes Claudia, Vestal, 521 Claudii, and Diana, 398 Ap. Claudius, Cos. 79 B.C., celebrated on coinage of 79 B.C., 398
dementia, 735 dementia Caesaris, temple of, 495 Colonisation, see Eporedia Columna Minucia, 274, 276 Concordia, 457, 466, 494, 510-11, 743; and Venus Cloacina, 511 Concordia ordinum, 441, 453 Coniuratio, 715 Contracting out, not used for production of Republican coinage, 617 Control-marks, 584-9 Corcyra: coinage of, 7, 192; production of Roman coinage on, 21, 192; see also Mints Corinth, archaeological evidence from, 74 Com-distributions, 73, 274-5, 277, 367, 414, 695> 703. 705. 707. 729; see also Leges frumentariae
Corn-supply,275,33i,440,45°-i» 466,638-9, 707 Cornelii, and Jupiter, 310, 319, 727 L. Cornelius Balbus, and Hercules, 742 P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus: legend of, 31011; not portrayed on Republican coinage, 310 L. Cornelius Sulla: augurate of, 373-4, 456; celebrated by contemporary moneyers, 732-3; celebrated posthumously by Q. Pompeius Rufus, L. Aemilius Buca and others, 456, 493, 734; changes practice of mint over amount of coin struck, 705; dedication at Aphrodisias, 373; dream of, 45°J 4935 imperium of, 373-4; Ludi Victoriae, 445-6, 732,734; proscriptions of, 349> 637-8; statue of, 397; supporters of, 387-8; titulature of, 80, 397; trophies of, 373> 450; and Apollo, 388; and Diana, 45O, 733 n. 1, cf. 493 (Luna); and felicitas, 387, 3975 and Hercules, 450; and libertas, 388; and res publica, 387, 732; and surrender of Jugurtha, 450; and Venus, 250, 373. 398, 448> 493. 727, 732; and Victory, 387> 398, 493» 732; see also Sibylla Corona: aurea, 488; civica, 315,735,741 n. 10, 742 n. 2 Cos, 741 Cosa, coinage of, 45 Crete, referred to on no. 432, 455 Croton, see Mints Cura annonae, see Corn-supply Debasement of silver coinage, 569-72, 616 Decempeda, 174 SsKdAiTpo;CTTorrrip,28-9 Delos accounts, coinage in, 632 Demeter, see Ceres Denarius: in Livy, 630; retariffing of, 73, 612-15, 621-5, 699 Denarius system: composition of, 3 ff., 24 ff.; date of, 28ff.; financing of, 33; first period of, 8 ff., 596, 615-16; see also Dupondius Diana: and Claudii, 398, cf. 733 n. 1; and Sulla, 450, 733 n. 1, cf. 493 (Luna); and Luna, 720-1; and Roma, 724-5; and Victory, 733 n. 1; of the Aventine, 497; temple of on the Aventine, 335, 389; see also Artemis Diana Nemorensis, 497 Diana Planciana, not represented on no. 432, 455 Didrachm coinage: date of, 37 ff.; interrelations within, 625-7; introduction of, 615 Dies: for Republican coinage, 576-7; preparation of, 577-8; correction of mistakes on, 578; re-cutting of, 578; in use, 641-94;
913
Indices Dies (cont.) numbers used for different issues, 640-94; numbers of coins struck by, 694 Dionysiac coin-types, 303, 369, 730; of M. Antonius, 743 n. 4; see also Bacchus, Liber Dioscuri: possible Egyptian iconography of, 315, cf. 730; and Luna, 720; and Sol and Luna, 719; and Penates, 317, 320, 7155 as patrons of Equites, 285; as protectors of sailors, 718; at battle of Lake Regillus, 335, 336 n. l, 715, 720; at battle of Pydna, 721 Dupondius, in first period of denarius coinage, 12, 159 Dyrrhachium, coinage of, 7
Floralia, 447, 521 Foedus, 715 Foedus Caudinum, 266 Foedus Numantinum, 266, 268, 728 Fontus, not represented on Republican coinage, 305 Forgeries, 548-53 Fortuna, 390-1, 476, 478, 485, 494, 510, 742, 743; and Victory, 510; see also Evrruxia Fortuna Caesaris, 530 Freedmen, registration of, 631 Fregellae, destruction of, and dating of Roman coinage, 74
Eagle, symbolism of, 720 Egypt: influence on Republican coinage, 140, 315, 584, 730; see also Alexandria, Ptolemaic coinage Elephant: and Caesar, 735J and Victory, 735 j head of, as badge of Metelli, 287, cf. 390 e.l.p., 611 Embezzlement, 633-4, 695 Emporiae, coinage of, 29 Engravers: additional, at work in mint, 50-1; for coinage of M. Antonius, 95,100; see also Artists Entremont, archaeological evidence from, 71 Ephesus, see Artemis, Mints Eporedia, colonisation of, 629 Epulum, 459 Equester ordo, 285, 631; census of, 623; see also Dioscuri Eryx, 478 j temple of Venus at, 448; see also Venus Etruria, see Mints a, temple of, 510J see also Fortuna
Gades, 742 Gauls, victories over, 298-9, 302, 308, 328, 332, 335, 339, 409, 453, 459, 464, 466, 479, 730-i, 735 Genealogies: legendary, 220; invented, 327, 333, 361,410, 413,441, 445, 448,471, 510, 730; see also Venus Genius: composite, 510; of Lugdunum, not appearing on no. 494, 510; populi Romani, significance of, 409, 733 Gentes, Roman, and favourite deities, 727 Gergis, coin types of, 476; see also Troy Gold coinage: Mars/Eagle, esp. 33-4, 626; Oath-scene, esp. 46, 548 (forgeries), 715; finds of, 691; possible use of gold by weight at Rome, 635; purity of, 569; weight of, 593; see also Ratios Gorgoneion, as Alexander motif, 468; see also Alexander Gortyn, coinage of, 287 Greece: influence on design of coin types, 408, 411, 579, 713, 725; stories about foundation of Rome, 722-3
Fabii, and Hercules, an Augustan fiction, 714, 727 Familiae Trojanae, 250, 476, 730 Fausta Felicitas, 373 Felicitas, 335, 372, 373, 387, 397, 460, 466, 494. 496, 511. 732, 735. 736, 738, 739. 743, cf. 510 Fides, 744 Financial organisation, 617-18, 633-95; see also Rome Finds (see also Archaeological evidence, Gold coinage, Hoards): Abruzzi, of Sullan gold piece, 80; Cilicia, of bronze of Q. Oppius, 546; Maddaloni, of Sullan bronze piece, 80; Rome (Tiber), of Sullan bronze piece, 80; Troad, of bronze coin of M. Antonius, 101 Flamen Floralis, 447 Flare, 407, 496, 599 n. 2
Helmet, as symbolof Macedonian king, 285,307 Heraclea: coinage of, 149, 632; family symbols at, 726 Hercules: and Juno, 720; and Acilii, 727; and L. Cornelius Balbus, 742; and Fabii, an Augustan fiction, 714, 727; and Poblicii, 727; and Rome, 714; and Sulla, 450; and Pompey, 451; and Pompeians, 737-8; as ancestor of Antonii, 510 Hercules theme: artistic variations of, 263, 266-7; perhaps Caesarian, 511 Hercules Respiciens, 311, 330 Hoards (indexed only where information supplementary to that in Roman Republican Coin Hoards is given) (see also Finds): Agrinion, 72; Aidone (1909), 30; Altamura, 86; Andalusia, 28; Apulia (of 50s), 88; (of 30s), 101; Azaila, 264; Beauvoisin, 292;
914
General Index Hoards (cont.) Carife, 42; Catanzaro, 4 0 - 1 ; Cazlona, 181; Cheste, 29; Citta Ducale, 30; Cordoba after 1945,67-8; Drieves, 10,26; Grammichele, 30; Greece, 86; Haluntium, 14; Italy, 38; Los Villares, 28; Mandanici, 16; Manfria, 67; Marcianise, 24; Mesagne, 38; Minturno, 15; Montedoro, 580, 583, 676; Morgantinaj 9; Morrovalle, 89; Nea Karvali, 86; Oppido Lucano, 38; Paestum, 25; Pisa, 25; Rome (Capitol), 3, 36; Santa Maria di Capua Vetere, 30; Serra Orlando, 25; Sicily, 30 n. 1, 46 n. 2; Surbo, 89; Sustinenza, 86, 674; Taranto, 67, 679; Terranova di Sicilia, 67; Thebes, 74; Tivisa, 26; Valdesalor, 79; Valera, 10; Valesio, 38; Zasiok, and campaign of L. Delmaticus, 75 'Hubbing', not used for Republican coinage, 577-8, cf. 582 Hybrids, of pure silver, produced by mint, 63-4, cf. 117 Imperium: alluded to on coinage, 728; Sullan claim to, 373-4; symbols of, 389,452,732; see also C. Iulius Caesar, Lex Cassia of 104 B.C. Isis, 437, 584 Issues of coinage, size of, 640-94 Italy: Punic coinage of, 10, 30-1, 40-1; and Rome, 404, 406-7, 413, 733; see also Mints Iulii: and Apollo, 325, 510; and Venus, 284, 325, 510, 727, 730 C. Iulius Caesar: age of, on coins, 92; celebrated by contemporary moneyers, 474, 476, 478, 482, 493-5. 496, 736-7; cointypes of, 735; deification of, 742, 744; finances of, 639, cf. 619; portrait of, 94, 493-5. 746-7. cf. 739-41; propaganda of in Civil War, 466, 735-6; titulature of, 89, 93, 494.736 n. 1; Trojan origin of, 476 (Gergis); trophies of, 464, 735-6; wreath of, 488; and dementia, 495, 735; and organisation of mint, 619; and tribunicia potestas, 494; and Rome, 737; and Salus, 461; and Venus, 474.493-5. 727. 735-6, cf. 496; and Victory, 461, 464, 468, 476, 478, 482, 483, 485, 4935. 735-6; as Imperator, 494; as Liberator, 483, 494; as Parens Patriae, 494; as Salius, 735; see also Elephant, Hercules theme C. Iulius Caesar Octavianus, see Octavian M. Iunius Brutus: celebrated by L. Servius Rufus in 41 B.C., 523, 742; coinage of, in 43-42 B.C., 741-2; form of name, 511-12, 741 n. 3; opposition to monarchic rule, 455-6, 741; portrait of, on coinage, 741, 748; titulature of, in 43-42 B.C., 741 n. 3 ; and ancestors, 456; and Apollo, 741
Iusiurandum in legem, 605 Janus: as coin-type, esp. 718-19; and Pompey, 739 Janus Curiatius, 260 Jehovah, and Bacchus, 454-5 Jugurtha, surrender of, 450 Juno: exoratio from Carthage, 720; fertilisation of, 308; and bull, 719; and goat, 264; and Hercules, 720 Juno Caprotina, not appearing on Republican coinage, 264 Juno Curritis, not appearing on Republican coinage, 260 Juno Regina, temple of, 287 Juno Soraria, 260 juno Sospita, 303, 323, 396, 440, 482, 519; and crow, 519; and gryphon, 399 Jupiter: statue of on Capitoline temple, 715; and Apollo, 312; and Comelii, 310, 319, 727; and Pegasus, 716; and Victory, 715, 720, 728, 730 n. 7, 732, 737-8 Jupiter Frugifer, 290 Jupiter Libertas, 290, 406 Jupiter Victor, 290, 533, 715 Kore, see Proserpina Lake Regillus, battle of, 335, 336 n. 1, 715, 720 Lanuvium, 323, 396, 399, 440, 482, 493, 519; confused with Lavinium, 482 Laodiceia-ad-Lycum, coinage of, 546 Lavinium, 320, 470; confused with Lanuvium, 482 Laws, dealing with coinage, 610-16; see also Leges, Lex Legatus fisci castrensis, 472 Leges: agrariae, 629-30; de ambitu, 729; frumentariae, 636, 638, 705; see also corndistributions; sumptuariae, 624; Porciae de provocatione, 293, 314, cf. 352 Leo, constellation, 740 n. 1 Letters, to differentiate issues, 6, 725-6 Leucothea, 404 Lex, possible on coin-types, 729; see also Plebiscitum Lex: Acilia, 293; Antia sumptuaria, 470; Cassia tabellaria, 290,403, 452; Cassia of 104 B.C., 452; Clodia on Victoriatus, 610-11; Clodia frumentaria, 638; Coelia Tabellaria, 459; Flaminia minus solvendi, 612-14; Gabinia, and effect on coinage, 728; Livia on debasement, 616; Ogulnia Fabia de aere argento auro flando feriundo, 615; Papiria, 77-8, 610-11; Porcia frumentaria, 705;
915
Indices Lex (com.) Rubria, 363; Rufrena, 742; Teremia et Cassia frumentaria, 705; Valeria, 621, 637; Voconia, 623 Liber: and Sol, 730; see also Dionysus Libertas, 290, 378, 388, 403, 406, 452, 456, 465, 494. 731-2. 733, 734, 741; and civitas, 407, 733; and Roma, 465; see also C. Iulius Caesar M. Licinius Crassus, pays own troops, 705 Lions, and M. Antonius, perhaps Alexander motif, 740, 743 Lipara: capture of, 322; coinage of, 322 Livy, Roman coinage in, 630 Locri, coinage of, 624-5 AOUKOUXAEIO, 80
l.p.d.a.p., 611 Luceria, see Mints Ludi: Apollinares, 344, 361, 402, 469; Cereales, 402, 4s 1, see also Cerealia; Circenses, 362-3, 729; Megalenses, 371, 402, 437. 4545 Plebeii, 402; Romani, 402, 615, 623, 627; Victoriae of Sulla, 445-6, 732, 734 Lugdunum, see Genius, Mints Luna: and Diana, 720-1; and Dioscuri, 720; and Rome, 720; see also Sol Macedonia, 285,307,455,459,496; mines in, 635; sec also Helmet, Shield (in Index of Types) Maddaloni, see Finds Magnus, Pompeian use of title, 83, 413 Mamertini, coinage of, 40, 580, 584, 714 Mamilii: descent from Telegonus, 220, 377; and Mercury, 377 C. Marius: celebrated by contemporary moneyers, 730-1; trophies of, 730; and settlement of vererans, 629-30; and Victory, 327, 328, 332, 730-1 Mars: on early didrachm issue, 713-14; on Second Punic War gold, 720; on no. 392, 406; not represented on no. 282, 299; and Roma, 722; and Triumvirs, 510, 740 Marsyas, not a symbol of libertas under the Republic, 378 Massalia: captured by Caesar, ^ 6 4 ; imitations of coinage of, 629; see also Mints Memmii, and Venus, 250, 321, 730 Mercury: and Apollo, 435; and Proserpina, 418; and Mamilii, 377 Messana, see Mamertini, Mints Metal content of Republican coinage, 569-77 Metapontum, see Mints Military issues, 604 Minerva, 501
Mines, 635 Mint: moving of M. Antonius, 95; organisation of, 618-20; see also Artists, L. Cornelius Sulla, Engravers, Hybrids, C. Iulius Caesar, Rome, Social War Mints of pre-denarius coinage: Luceria, 45; Messana, 40; perhaps Metapontum, 39 n. 5; Neapolis, 37 n. 5; Rome, 36,43 n. 5,104 f.; Sicily, 43,45; uncertain, 104 f.; in general, 600 of early denarius coinage: Campamia, 23 f.; Canusium, 21; Corcyra, 21; not Croton, 23; Etruria, 34; Luceria, 19 ff., 45; Rome, 8 ff.; Sardinia, 13; Sicily, 13 ff., 43; Spain, 22 f., 24; uncertain, 12 f., 34; in general, 600-1 Italian, for later denarius coinage, no evidence for, 47 for later denarius coinage: Africa: not the mint of no. 443,89, as mint, 93; Anagnia,not a mint, 95; Apollonia, 89, 738; Asia, 89; Brundisium, not the mint for no. 530,101; Buthrotum, perhaps as mint, 100; Cilicia: perhaps mint for no. 524, 101, perhaps mint for no. 550, 546; East, 93, 100, 101; Ephesus, 100; Greece, 92; Lugdunum, 499; Massalia, perhaps as mint, 94; Narbo, 35, 65, 71, 298, 600-1; Praeneste, not the mint for coinage of M. Antonius, 100; Puteoli, not the mint for no. 535, 102; Salpensa, 94; Sicily, 92, 94; Spain: not the mint for nos. 446-7, 92, as mint, 92, 94 Moneta, 41 Moneta castrensis, see Military issues Moneyers: origin of office, 601-2; office of, 598-603, 618-20; title of, 599; under Empire, 599 n. 1; recruitment of, 603; careers of, 708-11, 729; see also C. Sempronius Gracchus 'Monnaies a la croix', 10 Months, symbols of, 310 Morgantina: archaeological evidence from, 94; destruction of, 32 Murex-shell, 238 Mutunus Tutunus, not appearing on Republican coinage, 346 Narbo, date of foundation of, 71 ff.; see also Mints Navalia, not appearing on Republican coinage, 482 Neapolis, see Mints Nemesis, and Victory, 511 Neptune: temple of, 527; and perhaps Roma, 742; and Pompey, 739, 742 n. 2
916
General Index Nerio, not appearing on Republican coinage, 265 Norba, archaeological evidence from, 81 Novi homines, 413, 453 Novum saeculum, see Sol Numa, and Roman religion, 410, 447 Numantia, archaeological evidence from, 71; see also Foedus Nummi novi, 28 Nummularii, 603; see also Tessera Nummus, 626 n. 2, 632 Nundinum, 305 Octavian: celebrated by contemporary moneyers, 530, 531, 742J not celebrated by Q. Oppius, 546; coin-types 0^739-44; finances of in 44 B.C. and later, 639-40; reconciliation with M. Antonius, 531, 532, 743; settlement of veterans after Perusine War, 530; titulature of, 530, 531, 533, 742-4; and Apollo, 744; and augurate, 741 n. 1; and Victory, 510; and M. Antonius, ovatio of, issue celebrating, 101, 743; as Imperator, 740 October equus, 713-14 Oeniadae, coinage of, as Roman booty, 21, 32 Oikoumene, 450, 739 n. 2, 742 Orichalcum, as coinage metal, 573 Origo, reference to on Republican coinage, 726-8; see also Gades Osca, coinage of, 534 Ostia: foundation of, 361; sack of in 87 B.C., 361 Ovatio of 40 B.C., issue celebrating, 101, 743 Overstrikes, esp. 31-2, 39, 105 ff., 573, 579, 582, 604, 618 n. 4 Paestum, archaeological evidence from, 29 Palaemon, 404 Palaestra, gods of, 363 Parilia, 495 patre cos., 88 Pax, 494, cf. 496 Pecunia, etymology of, 718 Pegasus, and Jupiter, 716 Penates Publici, 317, 369; and Dioscuri, 317, 320, 715 Perusine War, see Octavian Phrygian helmet, 722 Pietas, 318, 739, 742, esp. n. 2 Plated coins, 560, 572 Plebiscitum reddendorum equorum, 285; see also Lex Pliny, on Roman coinage, 7, 30, 34, 35 ff., 43, 569-^72, 612-16 Poblicii, and Hercules, 727
Pollux, secondary to Castor, 136 Polos, see Artemis Pompeii, city, house of Caldus at, 459 Pompeii, family, and foedus Numaminum, 268 Cn. Pompeius Magnus: ambitions opposed by M. Iunius Brutus, 455-6, cf. 457; celebrated by contemporary moneyers, 450-1, 454> 457> 733—4; finances of in Civil War, 639; trophies of, 450; troops and finances in 54-50 B.C., 696; victory in Africa, 413; and augurate, 413; and Hercules, 451; and Venus, 448, 451, 733; and Victory, 450; as Janus, 739; as Neptune, 739, 742 n. 2; see also Magnus Cn. Pompeius junior, titulature of, 739 n. 1 Sex. Pompeius, titulature of, 739 Populares, 406, 409, 465, 605, 731-2, 733 Porticus Minucia, 275 Portraits: on Republican coinage, 734, 74950; use of others' to express political sympathy, 523; see also C. Iulius Caesar, M. Iunius Brutus Pound, Roman, 590 Praefectura socium, age at which held, 247 Praeneste: 418, 446; see also Mints praenomen imperatoris, 744 Praetors, and coinage, 620 Pri.fi., 95. 496, 619 Privernum, capture of, 445 Proscriptions: Sullan, 349,637-8; Triumviral, 512, 640 Proserpina, and Mercury, 418 Provincial government, see C. Sempronius Gracchus Provocatio, 293, 314, 352 Ptolemaic coinage, 39-40, 437, 584; see also Egypt Publicani, see Contracting out Punic coinage of Spain, 29, 310, 720; see also Agrigentum, Sardo-Punic coinage, Sicily, Italy Puteoli, see Mints Pydna, battle of, 721 Quadrigatus coinage: arrangement of, 103 ff.; date of, 46; mints of, 104-55 in Festus, 613-14; in Livy, 630; in Varro, 626 n. 4 Quaestors: insignia of, 741 n. 4; issues of, 601, 603, 607; organisation of college, 313, 330; and coinage, 616-18, 619-20 Quinarius, history of, 628-30 T. Quinctius Flamininus, issue of, 544 Quirinus, and Romulus, 451 Ratios: gold:silver, 626; silver:bronze, 626 ratiti quadrantis, 717, 744
917
Indices Reate, 311-12 Reckoning: Roman units of, 621-32; aberrant records of, Table XLVIII n. (last sentence), 624 n. 8, 625 n. 6; see also Accounts Res publica, and Roma, 725 n. 2; see also Roma, Rome Retariffing, see Denarius Rhinoceros, not appearing on Republican coinage, 201 Rhodes, 741 Rhome, not portrayed on Republican coinage, 722-3 Roma, 306-7,330; cult of, 725; head of, 721-5; and Diana, 724-5; and Libertas, 465; and Mars, 722; and Neptune, 742; and res publica, 725 n. 2; see also Res publica Roma Victrix, 297 Rome: foundation of, 722-3; caput return, 335, 389; 'Servian' census, 36-7; naval power, 41, 718 n. 6; loss of control of Italy after 216 B.C. reflected in coinage, 20, 23, 30, 600-1, 604, cf. 617; treaty with Aetolia, 21; financial stress during Second Punic War, 30, 32-3, 43, 634-5 »financingof denarius coinage, 33; financing of resumption of silver coinage in 150s B.C., 74; mint of, divided into two workshops in second century B.C., 65, 69; Senate of, and Saturninus, 73; in 50s B.C., 609; and Carthage, 634, 720; and Italy, 404, 406-7, 413. 733. and Sulla, 387, 732; and Pompeians, 739; and Caesar, 737; and Triumvirs, 511 j and Genius populi Romani, 409, and Hercules, 714; and Luna, 720; and Venus, 406, 7145 and Victory, 297, 344, 349, 356, 460, 714-15, 718, 720, 721, 722 n. 2, 729, 730-1, 734; and wolf, 404, 406; see also Finds, Fortuna populi Romani, Genius populi Romani, Mint, Mints, Res publica, C. Sempronius Gracchus, Senate Romulus: and Quirinus, 451; not a propaganda motif in late Republic, 733 n. 2 Romulus and Remus, finding by Faustulus, 267-8; see also Wolf and twins Rostra, shape of, 482 L. Rubrius Dossenus, debasement by, 569-72 Rumina, cult of, 268 Sabinum, 311, 330, 398, 452~3> 485. 7*9. cf. 3553 414 Saeculum novum, see Novum saeculum Salius, see C. Iulius Caesar C. Sallustius, anti-Triumviral sentiments of, 524 Salpensa, see Mints Salus: temple of, 339; and Caesar, 461
Sardinia, see Mints Sardo-Punic coinage, 10, see also Carthage Saturn, 718-19 Sceptre, see Scipio, Staff, Triumphator Scipio, 196 Scorpio, constellation, 406, 445 Seals, and coins, 727-8 Second Punic War, see Rome Selinunte, archaeological evidence and hoards from, 41 C. Sempronius Gracchus, perhaps secures election of supporters as moneyers, 75; provides expense allowances for provincial governors, 697; and Roman treasury, 636 Ti. Sempronius Gracchus: tribunate of, 275, 624; and Foedus Numantinum, 266, 268 Senate, and coinage, 606-9, 610, 612, 614, 616-18, 619-20; and Saturninus, 73 Senatus consultum, possible on coin-types, 729 Vllvir epulo, jug as possible symbol of, 743 Serrati, 174, 247, 298, 319-21, 375, 379, 389, 39i» 392. 396, 397. 398. 405, 4*0. 412. 413. 414, 419, 439; significance of, 581 ' Servian' census, see Rome Servilii, and Roman religion, 447-8 Sestertius: history of, 628; as unit of account, 614,621-5; after Lex Papiria, 611; inLivy, 631 Sibylla, not the origin of cognomen of Sulla, 250 Sicily: Punic coinage of, 30 n. 1; in slave war, 412; see also Mints Sidus Iulium, 744 Signa, 716, 718 Signature, artist's, see Artists Silver coinage: debasement of, 569-72, 616; weight of, 594-5; see also Ratios, Rome, also under different denominations Social War coinage, 75, 77 Social War: effect on production of coinage, 587, 608 n. 1; causing reduction in weight standard, 596 Sol: 510; and imminence of new age, 743; and Liber, 730; and Luna, 730, and imminence of new age, 511, 737, 740, and Dioscuri, 719, and Victory, 511; and M. Antonius, 740, 743 Soldiers, pay of, 622-4, 671, 696-7 Spain: province of C. Annius, 386, of C. Coelius Caldus, 459; Punic coinage of, 29, 40; see also Mints Spolia opima, 460 Staff, magisterial, 196, 274, 414 Standards: see Signa, Weight-standards Star, as indication of divinity, 297, 443, 485, 493. 494. 737. 738
918
General Index Striking of Republican coinage, 582; mistakes in, 582-3 Summanus, not represented on no. 310, 319 Survival rate, of Roman coinage, 640-93 Symbols, to differentiate issues, 6, 725-6 Syracuse: capture of, 330, 460; coinage of, i-2» 349. 632 Tarpeia, problems surrounding representations of, 355-6 Taurus, constellation: and Venus, 510; and Victory, 510 Technology, Greek and Roman, 569 Telegonus, ancestor of Mamilii, 220, 377 Tensae, not appearing on no. 348, 362-3 Terminus, not appearing on Republican coinage, 443 Terracina, 465 Terra manque, 335, 363, 372, 407, 409, 476, 510, 738 Tessera: voting, 335, 440, 483; nummularia, 412, 483; see also Ballot, Lex, Nummularii, Voting-scene Timaeus: on Roman monetary system, 36; on Roman coinage, 41 Trabea, 285, 397, 453 Trace elements in Republican coinage, 572 Tribes, initial letters of, 307, 335 Tribunate, symbols of, 483 Trinummus, 28 Triones, constellation, 404 Triumphal quadriga, 363 Triumphal relief from Via del Mare, 373,450, 457, 468 Triumphator: portrayal of, 308, 328, 413; wreath worn by, 488; sceptre of, 720 Troad, see Finds Trojan families, see Familiae Trojanae Trophies: Sullan, 373, 450; Pompeian, 450; Caesarian, 464, 735-6; Marian, 730 Troy: sacra from, 317, 716; and Roman origins, 714, 722, 730; see also Gergis, C. Iulius Caesar M. Tullius Cicero: and coinage, 733-4; and concordia ordinum, 441, 453; use of adulescens and similar terms, 72 Tusculum, 220, 305, 370, 418, 474, 523,727 728, cf. 317 Type-copying, 295, 305, 311, 322, 346, 349, 392, 398, 476, 5i9> 534, 546, 720, 745-9 Vacuna, not appearing on Republican coinage, 437 Valeria Luperca, not appearing on Republican coinage, 485 Valerius Antias, 631 Veiovis, 312 Velia, coinage of, 135
Velleius: exclusive reckoning in, 250; reliability of, 71 ff. Venus, 291; temple at Eryx, 448; and constellation Taurus, 510; and Rome, 406, 714; in 50s B . C , 448; and Memmii, 250, 321, 730; and Iulii, 284, 325, 510, 727, 730; and Sulla, 250, 373, 398, 448, 493, 727, 732; and Pompey, 448, 451, 733; and Caesar, 474, 493-5, 727, 735-6, cf. 496 Venus Cloacina, and Concordia, 511 Venus Erycina, 454; temple at Eryx, 448; see also Eryx Venus Genetrix, 474-5, cf. 478, 510 Venus Victrix, 373, 444, 474, 478, 494, 496, 732, 733, 735 Vesta, temple of, 452 Vestal Virgins, trial of, 440, 452 Via del Mare, triumphal relief from, 373,450, 457, 468 Via Praenestina, 306 Victoria Virgo, shrine of, 352 Victoriatus: not a peregrinus nummus, 7; origin of, 7, 192; later history of, 610, 628-30 Victory, 510; and Diana, 733 n. 1; and Fortuna, 510; and Jupiter, 715.720, 728, 730 n. 7, 732,737-8; and Nemesis, 511; and Sol and Luna, 511; and constellation Taurus, 510; and elephant, 735; and Rome, 297,344,349, 356, 460, 714-15, 7i8> 720, 721, 722 n. 2, 729, 730-1, 734; and second-century moneyers, 728; and Marius, 327, 328, 332, 730-1; and Sulla, 387, 398, 493, 732; and Pompey, 450; and Caesar, 461, 464, 468, 476, 478, 482, 483,485, 493-5, 735-6; and Triumvirs, 511; and Antonius, 740; and Octavian, 510; and Liberators, 741 Villa Publica, 453 Visor, shape of on early denarii, 162-3 Volcei, coinage of, 31 Volsinii, coinage of, 135 Voting: scene, 307,440; tessera, 335,440,483; urn, 483; see also Ballot, Lex Vulcan, as ancestor of Metelli, 288 Weight standards, Republican, 590-7; see also Pound; Pre-sextantal standards, dates of, 43,46; Semilibral standard, 615; Sextantal standard: associated with denarius, 6ff., 11-12; introduction of, 612; Uncial standard: appearance of, 612-15; indistinguishable from sextantal standard in early period, 11-12; restored, 596; Semuncial standard, in early denarius coinage, 13, 15, 19 ff.; in later period, 611 Wolf and twins: representations of, 719,729; see also Capitoline wolf, Rome, Romulus Wreath, see Corona, C. Iulius Caesar, Triumphator
919
3/1 b and la
4/1 a
6/1 5/1
\ 7/1
8/1
10/1
9/1
12/1
14/2
w 14/3
14/6
14/4
*
-\
19/1
18/1
18/2
18/5
18/6 18/4
21/2
24/4
^t*6
24/7
35/1
35/2
35/5
35/30
"N.
35/4
H
38/1
38/2
41/4
41/sa
43/1
43/2a
•Mfcsf*
f
••' I . I I .
26/2
26/4
27/2
14
2S/3
II
28/3
28/3
18/3
28/1 18/3
18/3
28/a
>3
18/4
14
18/3
Ill
18/3
28/3
28/3
58/3
28/3
18/3
28/3 32/t
IV
18/3
28/5
28/3
.5
34/1
19/3
29/3
29/3
19/3
s
':-
\
29/4
29ll
29/4
29/2
1,
« 40/Ib
VI
30/i
30/»
30/1
30/1
30/i
30/j
30/1
30/1
3O/1
•3
30/1
30/i
30/1
3O/I
VII
39/3 38/5
38/6
39/4
38/7
39/5
38/8
if 1 *"/
39/l
39/1
VIII
4i/8b
42/4
4'/9
,=,
i^'^%:,
41/11 43/3 a
42/1 43/5
IX •is.
:&*^
\
44/5
44/7
44/5 >4
44/6
44/<
44/1
44/3
V"v /
»8
44/4
44/6
^Ji
45/3
53/2
53/J
54/<
56/3var.
XI
56/i
,
56/6var
.A 56/3
56/4
v • S>
56/i
56/4
XII
XIII
5»/7 »
\V~ 59*i a
59/. b
^ "
59/4
XIV
68/3 a
71/tb
68/3 b
' 68/3
ft
# ^mm<
71/lc 73/4
69/1 t$
7»/5
69/2 a
69/6*
7»/t 72/7
70/i
XV
fk
fts/i
80/2
76/2
4
XVI
iOfi
XVII «5
*
95/1 b
V4S* •
»
»
•
'
'
95/1 c
95/J
•9
89/3
•'ii.sJ^! "\
K "x*
.I <:7,ia
:*\,
7. I r*
V—^
h'
"»»W
(I l
\
"• *
' *
»:-/'
^
97/1 <•
>3
.v^
1:1
I 94/t >4
»o/a 9S/ia
97/1 v a r . ^ »3
97/« V
XVIII
97/5 b
97/t3d
97/>7
97/22 i
97/22 b
97/12
97/23
«3
97/13* 97/2S
XIX
ft&i 18
^
102/2c
102/2 d
•*»,
H^C V
\ A V
XX
XXI
tio/ia
112/28
112/3
»l 2/1
112/2 »
113/i
ItS/l
XXII
116/2
119/1
120/4
xxm
»" i 132/1
is
«.*• V
.•33/1
XXIV
XXV
153/1
XXVI
159/3
l8
161/1
19
,6,/. X j
XXVII
XXVIII
XXIX
•77/1
177/3
• 78/3
179/1
XXX
XXXI
'92/1
»95/l
•92/2
195/3
193/2
193/4
197/1 a
194/1 197/1 b
194/2
198/1
XXXII
XXXIII
XXXIV
XXXV
XXXVI
239/1
235/3
239/3
240/1 a
237/1 a
244/3
245/1
238/1
238/3b
242/1
246/1
XXXVII
'
246/s
5
J W - ' > >,
249/4
2S0/1
255/1
259/1
XXXVIII
26315«
XXXIX
276/1
18
282/4
277/?
273/2
278/1
278/2
274/3
275/'
275*2
279/2
28O(1
286/1
XL
''
'V.
292/1
298/
«5
mi
301/1
\!>I X JV'CC«
XLI
308/1 b
308/3
308/4 a
308/4b
>3
E*-1 308/5
307/1 b
3u/id
313/4
XL1I
3l9/»
320/.
316/1 var.
322/1b
316/2 327/1
322/2
328/1
317/3 b
3i8/ia
329/1b
XLIII
£ -si*
<s\' : 332/1 b X^jT*T
333/1
«3
337/1 a
335/5b
XLIV
342/3 b
342/5 b
XLV
344/2 c
XLVI
354/1
349/1
352/1b
354/2
352/1 c
35°A/ie
(i 350A/2
353/1 a
XLVII
36o/ib
-T?*«^
9
361/1c
18
.•C
XLVIII
369/1
370/1 a
(M II >••-
376/1
373/1 b
374/1
377/1
16
377/1
382/1b
XLIX
394/1 a
385/4
385/5
390/2
396/1 b
391/1 a
X :'I l "
386/1
391/2
**
405/3 b
4O5/4a
«3
405/5
409/2
.,.
410/1
410/8
*'
407/1
411/ib
407/2
412/1
LI «7
419/2
425/t
426/3
LII
••'
434/2
»3
435/»
442/1 a
444/1 a
LIU 18
444/> C
445/> a
452/2
452/4 445/3D
452/5
44«/l
449/5
447/1 a 450/1 a
454/1
448/1 a
450/3 b 4S4/2
448/2 e
450/2
454/3
LIV
4SS/4
457/1
462/1b
464/1
18
462/2 458/1
464/3
LV
470/1 c
471/1
•
-
*
.
473/3
473/4
LVI
480/2 a
474/4
474/5
477/2
480/1
480/2 b
480/3
LVII
480/26
^hK^
480/27
480/28
480/18
/.,
480/19
48o/7b
s r \ »/0^$k «»y*"
483/1
15
480/23 16
484/1
480/24 »7
480/15
480/25
485/2
LVIII
'
489/4
489/5
489/6
490/j
486/1
487/1
487/28
488/1
LIX
494/14
j$k'- • ''
ft s I I "^
494/26 a
$k-M $f$ik 494/28
*7?, 494/10
494/i8
494/30
494/1*
494/aoa
' ^ ^ . .
/
LX
494/32
494/41
494/42 C
494/37
494/38
494/39
506/1
502/3
,
502/4
503/1
^
LXII
LXin
mm t§tt ,,£t^:>
•
534/3
1 4
X 535/« S16/1
5*7/1
LXIV
N8S>
546/8
548/1 a
;€!'#!
544/12
TV
LXV
LXVI
9b 0-K> $3h\/=8 -ft
oA
8i
<§C^a
LXVII
130
150
2 160
177
l87 ^
BOtt
MATTMCLV
LXVIII
o
«»
q
IT
ii
of
A 91
101
a?
o
9
LXIX
*»
«97
207
V 227
=0
LXX
3
*4
9
vf_5
10
t* ri
\
6
T
r
i 1
L 1
J
0? T
81
CJD
i
t
\
/
i
•
f
t