DOI Artikel:
Morawiecki, Lesław: Coins from Cossyra
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.21230#0131
battle, and succeeded in evacuating their troops from Aspis, they never-
theless lost their fleet in a storm. And the Carthaginians ąuickly recoy-
ered Cossyra. Still, in tribute to their accomplishments, the two Roman
consuls were awarded the right to a triumph de Cossurensibus et Poeneis,
which took place on January 18 and 19, 254 BC.11 In this context it is
perfectly obyious that the temporary mastery of Cossyra had no military
significance, and most likely occurred by the merest happenstance. The
island owed its separate place in a Roman triumph not so much to its
own status (to a certain extent independent, as Moscati argues), as to
the fact that it was the site of a battle.
Cossyra was recaptured by the Romans in 217 BC. At that time, Cn.
Servilius, operating with his sąuadron on the Libyan coast, on his way
back to his base in Lilybaeum in Sicily, conąuered the island and estab-
lished a Roman garrison in the city of the same name.12 From that time
forward, Cossyra formed a piece of the Roman State, belonging admin-
istratively to the province of Sicily. In 82 BC, Cn. Papirius Carbo took
shelter on Cossyra, where he was captured.13 The island attracted some-
what more attention in 36 BC, when it was besieged by the forces of
Sextus Pompey, who intended in this way to deprive M. Lepidus of
a convenient port and simultaneously gain a support base for his opera-
tions against Sicily.14 And this is just about all the written sources have to
say about Cossyra.
Al the greater hope is then invested in archeological sources. For
lack of inscriptions, the coinage takes on particular significance.15 The
origin of these coins can be specified with complete certainty, sińce the
name of the mint occurs in the legend. The interpretation of the im-
ages also arouses little controversy. What is open to ąuestion, however, is
the date these coins were struck, the weight standard, and the denomi-
11 CIL I2, p. 47, Acta Triumphalia Capitolina; cf. p. 173.
12 Polybius III.96; cf. Livy XXII.31, who, writing of Servilius's campaign, says nothing
about the conąuest of Cossyra; cf. Miinzer, s.v. Servilius 61, RE, Bd. II\ coli. 1794-1795.
13 Liv. per. 89. Cf. Appian, BC 1.96.449; Orosius, V.21.11; V.24.16; cf. M. DreiBmann-
Merten, s.v. Papirius 16, KR IV. coli. 489-490.
14 Appian, BC V.97.405.
15 See A. Mayr, Die antiken Munzen derlnseln Maila, Gozo und Pantelleńa, Miinchen 1895;
C. R Hill, Coins of Ancient Sicily, Rondon 1903; E. Gabrici, Monetazione di bronzo nella Sicilia
antica, Palermo 1927.
131
theless lost their fleet in a storm. And the Carthaginians ąuickly recoy-
ered Cossyra. Still, in tribute to their accomplishments, the two Roman
consuls were awarded the right to a triumph de Cossurensibus et Poeneis,
which took place on January 18 and 19, 254 BC.11 In this context it is
perfectly obyious that the temporary mastery of Cossyra had no military
significance, and most likely occurred by the merest happenstance. The
island owed its separate place in a Roman triumph not so much to its
own status (to a certain extent independent, as Moscati argues), as to
the fact that it was the site of a battle.
Cossyra was recaptured by the Romans in 217 BC. At that time, Cn.
Servilius, operating with his sąuadron on the Libyan coast, on his way
back to his base in Lilybaeum in Sicily, conąuered the island and estab-
lished a Roman garrison in the city of the same name.12 From that time
forward, Cossyra formed a piece of the Roman State, belonging admin-
istratively to the province of Sicily. In 82 BC, Cn. Papirius Carbo took
shelter on Cossyra, where he was captured.13 The island attracted some-
what more attention in 36 BC, when it was besieged by the forces of
Sextus Pompey, who intended in this way to deprive M. Lepidus of
a convenient port and simultaneously gain a support base for his opera-
tions against Sicily.14 And this is just about all the written sources have to
say about Cossyra.
Al the greater hope is then invested in archeological sources. For
lack of inscriptions, the coinage takes on particular significance.15 The
origin of these coins can be specified with complete certainty, sińce the
name of the mint occurs in the legend. The interpretation of the im-
ages also arouses little controversy. What is open to ąuestion, however, is
the date these coins were struck, the weight standard, and the denomi-
11 CIL I2, p. 47, Acta Triumphalia Capitolina; cf. p. 173.
12 Polybius III.96; cf. Livy XXII.31, who, writing of Servilius's campaign, says nothing
about the conąuest of Cossyra; cf. Miinzer, s.v. Servilius 61, RE, Bd. II\ coli. 1794-1795.
13 Liv. per. 89. Cf. Appian, BC 1.96.449; Orosius, V.21.11; V.24.16; cf. M. DreiBmann-
Merten, s.v. Papirius 16, KR IV. coli. 489-490.
14 Appian, BC V.97.405.
15 See A. Mayr, Die antiken Munzen derlnseln Maila, Gozo und Pantelleńa, Miinchen 1895;
C. R Hill, Coins of Ancient Sicily, Rondon 1903; E. Gabrici, Monetazione di bronzo nella Sicilia
antica, Palermo 1927.
131