DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.51762#0095
HISTORICAL ROMAN COINS
Rome the guardian of his son or not, we can well
imagine that the Romans would take full advantage of
any claim, real or invented, to such a title. It might
be used diplomatically, and yet not find a place in the
narrative of a Polybius or a Livy. It seems reason-
able, therefore, to believe that the story of this
guardianship is founded upon fact, although some
elements of exaggeration may have made their way
into the family tradition.
Count de Salis attributed the coin with which we
are dealing to the year 65 B.c., approximately. The
date is based on the stylistic connexion between this
moneyer’s coins and the coins of Q. Pomponius Musa
and M. Piso M. f. Prugi, which de Salis assigns, on
different grounds, to 67 and 66 b.c. respectively.
Mommsen, on the other hand, prefers the date 61,
since about that time negotiations, upon which the
fate of Egypt hung, were going on at Rome. There
is, it is true, no reason to assume that the type must
have been inspired by some event of the moment; it
was chosen primarily as an illustration of the moneyer’s
family history. Nevertheless, there may well have
been some such connexion with current events. We
know that Ptolemaeus Auletes spent the greater part
of his reign and much of his fortune in attempts to
obtain the support of Rome. Some circumstances in
his intrigues even as early as 65 b.c. may therefore
well have inspired the type.
55
Rome the guardian of his son or not, we can well
imagine that the Romans would take full advantage of
any claim, real or invented, to such a title. It might
be used diplomatically, and yet not find a place in the
narrative of a Polybius or a Livy. It seems reason-
able, therefore, to believe that the story of this
guardianship is founded upon fact, although some
elements of exaggeration may have made their way
into the family tradition.
Count de Salis attributed the coin with which we
are dealing to the year 65 B.c., approximately. The
date is based on the stylistic connexion between this
moneyer’s coins and the coins of Q. Pomponius Musa
and M. Piso M. f. Prugi, which de Salis assigns, on
different grounds, to 67 and 66 b.c. respectively.
Mommsen, on the other hand, prefers the date 61,
since about that time negotiations, upon which the
fate of Egypt hung, were going on at Rome. There
is, it is true, no reason to assume that the type must
have been inspired by some event of the moment; it
was chosen primarily as an illustration of the moneyer’s
family history. Nevertheless, there may well have
been some such connexion with current events. We
know that Ptolemaeus Auletes spent the greater part
of his reign and much of his fortune in attempts to
obtain the support of Rome. Some circumstances in
his intrigues even as early as 65 b.c. may therefore
well have inspired the type.
55