The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR

Additional services for The Classical Review:

Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here

The Coinage of the Age of Constantine Numismatique Constantinienne. By Jules Maurice. Paris: Leroux, 1908. Tome I. Pp. clxxix + 507. With 23 plates.

Warwick Wroth

The Classical Review / Volume 23 / Issue 05 / August 1909, pp 159 - 162 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00003504, Published online: 27 October 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00003504

How to cite this article: Warwick Wroth (1909). The Classical Review, 23, pp 159-162 doi:10.1017/ S0009840X00003504

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 132.203.227.62 on 08 Jul 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW twenty-six the place or tribe to which they end of 90 B.C, i.e. to the beginning of the belonged is added: some of these local siege of Asculum, whither after the victory of names are unknown, but all that are known Pompeius over Lafrenius at Firmum the sur- occur in Pliny's list of the principal tribes of vivors of the defeated Piceni took refuge. Of the conventus of the district of Caesaraugusta, the gifts mentioned, that of the corniculum is so that we may assume that the rest belonged known to us from a passage of Livy (x. 61), to the same district. The names are all where, coupled with the bracelet (both purely barbaric, and interesting to the philo- being in that case of silver), it was given to logist. cavalry soldiers who had distinguished them- The space in the lower right-hand corner selves in the third Samnite war. Of the gift of the plate is occupied by the text of the of the patella (probably also of silver), or second decree, by which certain rewards were* small patera for libations, no other case conferred on the soldiers of the troop for their appears to be known, except that of the valour—Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator'\ vir- gift to Probus in his youth of a patera tutis caussa turmam \ Salluitanam donavit in weighing five pounds, among other rewards, I castreis apud Asculum \ cornuculo et patella for conspicuous bravery in the Sarmatian torque \ armilla palereis (sic) et frumenium war (Vopiscus, Vita Probi, 5, 1). The other (sic) I duplex. ornaments are welh known, and were con- An important difference may be noticed at stantly given as rewards of valour, and the once between the two decrees: in the first, gift of double rations of corn (or double pay, conferring the citizenship, the grant is made as it later on came to mean) was so frequent with the approval of the consilium, which that the term duplarius or duplicarius is often normally consisted of all the military tribunes met with in inscriptions of the imperial present and the chief centurion (primuspilus) period. 3 of each legion (Mommsen, Staatsrecht, i . The exact provenance of this inscription is 316), and, no doubt, in virtue of special pro- not known, but there is no doubt that it was visions contained in the lex Julia of 90 B.C. one of the many original documents which For the second, no such approval was were kept on the Capitol, only a few frag- needed, the ordinary powers included in the mentary specimens of which had hitherto imperium being sufficient. The interesting been known, and those all now preserved particular is here added, that the gift was in Naples. As Professor Gatti remarks, made ' in camp before Asculum' (modern with justifiable pride, this is the only Ascoli Piceno). That both decrees were specimen of its kind now in Rome, and has promulgated at the same time, there is no fitly found a resting-place once more on the doubt; and as there is no mention of very hill where it was originally preserved. Pompeius being consul, which he became in 89 B.C., the inscription must belong to the THOMAS ASHBY.

REVIEWS

THE COINAGE OF THE AGE OF CONSTANTINE. ' for whether,' he says, ' I look to the East or Numismatique Constantinienne. By JULES the West, or cast my eyes over all the world, MAURICE. Paris: Leroux, 1908. Tomel. I see the blessed Emperor present every- Pp. clxxix + 507. With 23 plates. where.' Some such feeling may have been EUSEBIUS begins his life of Constantine the awakened in the breasts of numismatists who Great by an expression of his feelings as to for several years past have been accustomed the great and universal interest of the subject, to note, in all the principal numismatic i6o THE CLASSICAL REVIEW periodicals of the world, the appearance of is found in the exergue of coins struck in A.D. articles by M. Maurice dealing with the 324. The acturl inauguration of the city, as money that was used 'pendant la periode city, is celebfailSd, after May 11, 330, by the Constantinienne.' Such articles have been issue of coins bearing the personification of welcomed as the first successful attempt to Constantinople; and only after this date did grapple in a scientific way with an enor- the imperial court move to its new centre. mously complicated mass of detail—types, Again, the celebration of imperial anniver- mints, dates and legends—and also as being saries is marked by the issue of coins with the evident outcome of widely extended special types; and we have similar contem- numismatic research and of unusual know- porary records of the visits of the Emperor ledge of the political and financial history of to Rome, of meetings of Emperors, of vic- the period during which the coins were issued. tories over the barbarians, of the first appear- There was one regret arising from M. ance of a new Caesar or a new Augustus. Maurice's piece-meal method—no doubt in- But such types, however curious in them- evitable—of publishing his studies: the whole selves, only become fully instructive when series seemed in every sense of the word to they are arranged not merely according to require binding together, and needed a subject, or, as in Cohen's work, alphabetically general introductory article which would according to the legends, but chronologically. summarize and explain results. But by the The determination of the chronology is thus publication of the present exhaustive and of high importance, and is a salient feature amplified work the author has completely of M. Maurice's monograph. removed any such occasion of regret. In I am obliged to pass over the sections on the volume before us (which will be followed denominations and on the highly elaborate by a second volume) we have first of all an constitution of the mints, though with regard Introduction which deals with the various to the latter it may be remarked that a denominations of the coinage and the con- principal characteristic of Diocletian's mone- stitution of the mints, and an elaborate tary reforms was his multiplication of mints. chronology of the Constantine period, of He found only eight in operation and set as which both the literary and the numismatic many more in motion, some, indeed, only evidence form the basis. Then follows a alternately. Under Constantine, the highest long chapter on the imperial Iconography, number reached was nineteen. M. Maurice and finally a detailed description of the has necessarily paid special attention to mint- coins struck at the various imperial mints. marks and secret mint-marks—to the fairly Of these mints there were no less than obvious RP and RS, the first and second nineteen. In the first volume the output of workshops (j>rima, secunda, officind) of the the mints of Rome, Ostia, Aquileia, Carthage mint of Rome, and to more recondite marks and Treves is described; in the second, we like I and H, which, being interpreted, shall have a description of the remaining mean Jovius and Herculius, and refer to fourteen mints and—may we hope?—a good Diocletian and Maximian. Many Christian index. symbols seem also to figure as the symbols Any of us who have been prone to regard and secret-marks of mint-officials, when the the coinage of Constantine as a conglomera- times were favourable, as between the years tion of somewhat banal types and hetero- 320 and 324, when Constantine legislated geneous legends may require M. Maurice's in favour of the Church. reminder that these coins were official issues, The chronological lists are, as I have and that all the important acts of the already indicated, minute and valuable, and imperial government are indicated by their include a list of the imperial titles as they legends or by the striking of special types vary from year to year, and these titles, and denominations. Thus, the date of the brought together chronologically, set forth in foundation of Constantinople—'le bapteme firm outline the political changes of the de la nouvelle capitale'—may be fixed by period, and offer a welcome clue to the exits the inscription CONST(antinopolis) which and entrances of the enormous cast of the THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 161 imperial drama. In 309 there were six can give us only the portrait of Diocletian. Augusti, but an Emperor does not necessarily But on 1 April 285 Diocletian took as strike coins in the name ^" his colleagues, colleague an 'Augustus' Maximian Her- and the absence of coins is sometimes as cules. The new Augustus had the West for instructive as their existence. For instance, his sphere, and accordingly in the Western Maxentius isolated in Italy, and Alexander mints we find a new head inscribed with at Carthage, strike only in their own names: Maximian's name. But in the Eastern mints, Constantine strikes for all the four leading those within the sphere of Diocletian, we Augusti but not for Galerius, who had refused note that such coins as are issued with the him the title of Augustus. name of Maximian are accompanied by the If the Classical Review were a purely portrait of Diocletian. The Eastern mints numismatic periodical it would be desirable, not having received the model of Maximian's to extend considerably this notice of a book portrait presented Diocletian's, but at the which furnishes invaluable material both to same time recognized Maximian by encircling the historian and the student of coins; but it it with Maximian's name. So, then, the may be sufficient, in conclusion, to say Western mints give us a true portrait of something of the chapter that deals with Maximian; the Eastern mints (in spite of portraiture, more especially as being likely to their accompanying inscription) do not. interest those readers who may not have With regard to the coins issued in the name followed M. Maurice's researches when they of Diocletian during this period, we find the first appeared. true portrait of that Emperor both in his " Most archaeological writers, including own Eastern sphere and in the Western Cohen and Bernoulli, have remarked on the mints of Maximian, the reason for this being great difficulty, or impossibility, of ascertain- that Diocletian's effigy was already in use ing from coins the true portraiture of the throughout all the imperial mints before the Emperor Diocletian and his successors of accession of Maximian. the period of Constantine. M. Babelon, in- Lastly, in order to carry the complication deed, published a most enlightening study of a little further, we pass on to the year 293, the portraits of a later Emperor (Julian), but when to the two Augusti were added two it has been reserved for M. Maurice to deal Caesars, namely, Constantius Chlorus and with the whole subject in detail, and, what is Galerius. Each of these Caesars strikes coins more, to discover the secret. The view that in his own name and also in that of his there are no true portraits discoverable on colleague. But here, again, the name around the coins seems at first sight to be justified the portrait does not invariably serve as the by the fact that we find the most diverse correct label. For Constantius, in his own effigies accompanied by the name of one and mint of London, places his own head on all the same Emperor. But this apparent diffi- the coins, even on those struck in the name culty vanishes when the coins are carefully of Galerius; and, on the other hand, the sorted (as by M. Maurice) under mints and coins struck by Galerius, in his own mint of periods. Then, it becomes evident that there Siscia, bear solely the effigy of Galerius, even was at least a method in the apparent in the case of coins struck by him in the vagaries of the different mint-masters in their name of his colleague Constantius. The choice of effigies. The whole subject is reason for this substitution of portraits no extremely complicated, but it may be made doubt was that the mint-masters of the two clear by observing what took place at the Caesars did not exchange the Caesars' por- beginning of the period when this practice traits, and had to be content with inscribing arose of putting forth a single effigy bearing a name that did not belong to the portrait the names of varying Emperors. that they utilized. These clues to an apparent • We are first on solid ground in the maze of portraiture having been obtained, it period 17 Nov. 284-1 April 285, when the is possible to construct the real iconography Empire had but one ruler—Diocletian. of the Emperors and Caesars; and with Coins that belong to this period obviously respect to the general character of the por- NO. ccm. VOL. XXIII. 162 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW traits, M. Maurice remarks that the coins are each imperial personage brings all the details not without artistic value, and that they are of the evidence before the reader. (apparently) fairly characteristic. An analysis (illustrated by the plates) of the portraiture of WARWICK WROTH.

DIVINI ELEMENTA POETAE.'

Appendix Vergiliana. Recognovit et adnota- commenta : Moretum 15 plausa (for clausd) : tione critica instruxit R. ELLIS. Oxonii: e Culex 62 feruent {fuerint codd.), 140 fleta Typ. Clarend. 1907. (Pages not num- (laeta codd.), 274 ecfossasque. And scattered bered.) up and down the Apparatus are a number of less certain conjectures, which I should pro- Poeti Latini Minori. Testo Critico : Com- nounce superior to those of previous editors. mentato: da G. CURCIO. Vol. ii, fasc. 2. Some suggestions do not appeal: as the Appendix Vergiliana (Dirae, Lydia, Ciris). notion of an old English gloss egor at Ciris Pp. 198+xv. Catania: Battiato, 1908. 481 : ibidem 249 scora: Culex 221 lurent (a VERGIL'S 'Fruhzeit' has just now a peculiar word which Mr. Housman introduces into fascination for Latin scholars: and whether Ovid, but which is otherwise strange to the the poems of the Appendix Vergiliana are or best Latin poets). At Ciris 218 Ellis retains are not, any of them, Vergilian, they most of 'nutantia' sidera mundi, but it can hardly bear them belong to 'Vergil's Friihzeit,' and a the sense 'bickering' which he gives to it respectable text of them is the necessary (A.J.P. xv. p. 479). The stars are part of a preliminary to a study of that fascinating convexd ''nutans' pondere mundus (Eel. iv. 50). period. This, thanks to Prof. Ellis, we now At 303 ibid, the view (which seems to me possess. The limitations of Ribbeck's text certain: so too Prof. Hardie) that a line has are well known. Baehrens' edition seems to been lost at least deserved mention. At be out of print; and, though Prof. Ellis pro- Culex 264 V's ca points, I think, not to nounced it on its appearance to be a great causa (Ellis), but merely to the cura of the advance on Ribbeck, I have never been able other MSS.: ca as a contraction for cura is to see that, save in the direction of simplifi- found also at Tibullus 3. 2. 25. cation (in the Apparatus), Baehrens did any In the selection of MSS. upon which to great service to the text of the pseudo- base his texts Ellis has followed a middle Vergiliana, apart from the clever and certain course. He has not overwhelmed us with correction, coccina for cognita, at Ciris 169. the readings of MSS. worth nothing; and he In any case Prof. Ellis' text will at once has at the same time given the student of the supersede its predecessors. Not only are his text as much as he can want. It is in the collations new (correcting those of other Culex that he is perhaps most open to scholars at a great many points), but his criticism.1 To my mind, we could quite well recension has been made with great tact and have dispensed with the readings of G and T. prudence, and with that consideration for Their claims to independent value seems to others from which alone can be born a work- Vne to rest solely on 51, where Ellis, with able text. Indeed, as a textual critic Prof. them, reads ripis. But even here the parallel Ellis is perhaps here seen at his best. In which Skutsch cites from Ovid Hem. Am. emendation he has never been more felicitous, 178-180 tells strongly in favour of rupes. and that in poems where scholars like F again adds nothing of value to B. With Scaliger constantly dissatisfy, and where Sillig regard to Vossianus 81 (Voss.), I do not is probably as successful as anyone. Among quite understand Ellis' position. Baehrens emendations of Ellis' which I think certain 1 are Ciris 321 praes sit (for pressit): 323 This was written before the appearance of Mr. Housman's paper on the MSS. of the Culex.